Hacker News Reader

Comment by causality0 | Hacker News Reader

Realism is not and has never been VR's problem. VR being a pain in the ass is VR's problem. The hardware is annoying to break out and get comfortable if you wear glasses. The software is an absolute nightmare. Backwards compatibility is pathetic compared to a PC and you're never quite sure if a game you heard about is going to be available for whatever platform you invested in. There's also no faith in durable VR products. The people who bought a headset and phone to use Samsung VR got fucked. The people who bought a headset and a Google Daydream-certified phone got fucked. The people who bought an Oculus Go got fucked.

Maybe when I can get a headset that offers onboard focus-adjustment and some kind of omnidirectional treadmill I'll sink another thousand dollars into VR but until then I am done.

View on HN

I kinda feel like VR is still in the "Should I get an Amiga? Or an Atari? Or a TRS80? Or a ZX81? Or an Apple II?" stage.

One day it'll end up consolidated into some equivalent of Windows/Mac/Linux, probably categorised into the same sort of "business/professionals", "artists/creatives", and "geeks/tinkerers" approximate major demographics.

If you need some hints about which platform(s) will "win", keep an eye on what I buy. And avoid them. I have a GearVR/S6Edge - on a shelf with my Apple Newton, Sinclair ZX80, and Betamax video recorder. I think perhaps my only technology win is the turntable I bought in 1985 and still use...

You needed an Amiga to play Dactyl Nightmare back in the day,IIRC.

That and “Altered State”

And lets face it, none of the other platforms ever had a Guru Meditation Error

It caught on later: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guru_Meditation#Legacy

Tangent: You might appreciate the premise of "harbinger customers"[1]. The theory is that there actually are consumers who are a bit out of sync with the collective and do indeed consistently value/buy products that lose out.

I suspect I'm a fellow harbinger. I thought Apple was cool in the 90s and that Microsoft was on to something in the 00s-early 10s (including Win8/Phone), so I'm at least a solid 5+ years off (or, as a positive spin, simply much too early).

[1] https://boingboing.net/2019/12/03/harbringer-of-doom.html)

Thanks!

But:

> Harbinger households tend to be white, suburban and headed by older, less-educated single parents.

Ouch...

> I thought Apple was cool in the 90s and that Microsoft was on to something in the 00s

It's not on my shelf of bad decisions anymore, but in '95 I though I was making the best possible purchase when I bought a Mac 6100 DOS Compatible... A Mac with a daughterboard that had a 486DX2 which ran MS-DOS and Windows 3.1 and later Win95. (I paid $1200AUD for 3 8MB SIMMs for that, so the DOS board didn't;t have to share RAM with the Mac...)

> > Harbinger households tend to be white, suburban and headed by older, less-educated single parents.

Bad at picking products and life partners.

Sounds like high school me buying a zen creative and a zune because they were "better than iPods" and hating iPhones when they came out because physical keyboards would always be superior.

I still agree with your high school inner child. I never made a single apple purchase in my life and I'm glad I never fell for the marketing.

Marketing and peer pressure! See how punished you've been here for expressing a dissenting opinion!

Frankly I hate on-screen keyboards. Wish phones were a little smaller but fatter with physical keyboards.

Are you really willing to trade all that screen real estate?

I'd buy a iPhone with a slide-out keyboard—a la the HTC Dream/G1 [1]—in a heartbeat. I'm happy with the onscreen keyboard for simple things like a quick search or message, but I also really want the option for a proper, physical keyboard any time I need to dig in and write something in depth. Bonus points for slider style devices like the G1 because you still got the "full size" screen, without having to sacrifice on keyboard size either; it really was the best of both worlds, and it's still my favorite device form factor I've ever used.

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTC_Dream

That article brings back memories - I had a HTC Desire Z which had a sick slide out mechanism. That was also my first smartphone!

I remember it was great for emulation of SNES and GBA games because of its physical keyboard.

I loved my Motorola Droid. Tiny phone (3.7" screen took up the whole body !) with a slide out full qwerty keyboard. If someone was crazy enough to make it today with a snapdragon I'd be all over it. Choice quote from this review to show how 2009 it was:

> The Motorola Droid on Verizon is the first device to feature Google Maps Navigation. It’s a completely free service that offers 3D maps with voice guided turn-by-turn directions. The VZ Navigator available on most Verizon Wireless phones costs an additional $10 a month for use. A decent turn-by-turn direction App on the iPhone sells for a one time fee of nearly $80-$100. On the other hand Google Maps Navigation is entire free and is offers a lot more.

https://skatter.com/2009/11/motorola-droid-verizon-review/

Astro Slide? https://store.planetcom.co.uk/products/astro-slide

Peculiar device, I like it! Reminds me more of my Vaio C1 I had back in 2001, great laptop, got itself in the movies :)

http://www.starringthecomputer.com/computer.html?c=64

Just in case anyone reading this is considering purchasing the Astro Slide... be very wary. I backed the Indiegogo campaign over 2 years ago, still nothing. The wait isn't the issue here (COVOD and the related supply chain issues are real, I get that), but the major lack of transparency from PlanetCom is abysmal. A quick read of a few pages of the comments on the Indiegogo campaign page gives you a pretty clear picture of how many of the backers feel...

You might be interested in this https://www.fxtec.com/pro1x

They are shipping soon after many delays.

> physical keyboards would always be superior.

And they still are. I hate virtual keyboards, it's just a terrible experience. It requires a lot of attention, has low accuracy and features like swipe are too unreliable that I find them useful in the long run.

Multi lingual swipe works just fine on my iPhone with Google keyboard. If it is not it's just because I get too comfy and lazy, not actually "spelling" the words properly. With the dawn of on device language models I believe the typing experience will get even better in the upcoming years.

Language models and dictionaries will always be incomplete and out of date.

I just don't like being slowed down by a clever feature not working as expected and so for me a physical keyboard simply cannot be replaced. It always feels like a fragile crutch otherwise.

The only claim which I am making is that the p(word|swiped pattern) is inferior to p(word|swiped pattern, previous words).

Speaking of reliability, I suspect that screen keyboards are much more reliable than physical ones for a pocket device such as a phone or tablet. Much worse in usability and feel (if we ignore their ability to easily reconfigure to the task, such as a dedicated numpad where it makes sense), but likely more reliable as long as you don't break your screen, as there's less mechanical parts to break.

Based on my experience with a Blackberry phone I'd say the average physical keyboard lasts significantly longer than the phone's update support.

Sure it's got mechanical parts but reliable switches are not rocket science. Now analog sticks are a different story apparently.

> hating iPhones when they came out because physical keyboards would always be superior.

I mean you're not wrong. They're just sl8ghtly more expensive

What do you think the next big thing it? What product segments and companies look really promising?

If the correlation turns out accurate, that would explain why marketers use every possible tactics to collect data about who we are and what we purchase, as it could give them an indicator of which product will fail. Such profiling is already done for targeted advertising, although this way it means buyers are also finely categorized including data about their political orientation and other sensitive aspects of their life.

ps. I like a lot Cory Doctorow's articles; also Boing Boing was among my favorite sites in the early 2k; I'm saddened to see what it has become today: mostly a shop for overpriced crap. Suffice to say that after noticing my account was terminated during my long hospitalization in late 2020 with no warnings given, I didn't create another and removed the site from my bookmarks.

The Zune was one of the nicest pieces of tech I've ever owned, and nothing anyone says will convince me otherwise.

Did you manage to squirt a random Zuner in public transport?

Oh yeah. The soft-touch casing that still hasn't degraded and the d-circle were the peak of ergonomic satisfaction.

Thought Iridium would really be a good investment. Same with the JAZ drive.

You can count me in that group. I'm that guy who bought weird Toshiba and Archos MP3 players because they supported USB mass storage. I am now buying a Unihertz Pocket, a QWERTY phone in 2022.

I'd be beating down their door if they offered a model that swapped the keyboard for a d-pad, circle pad, and buttons.

It seems like Apple waits to see what other people do and then come out with a product that works for normal people. When I see Apple come out with iVR, then I will start to believe that VR might actually go mainstream.

VR works for me today, for what I use it for. What on earth does it mean to "work for normal people"?

I think what he is trying to say is, that different companies experiment with a concept (for example, what business phone or touch screen phone were 20 years ago) Apple is observing that and when the moment is right will launch it's own product (iPhone).

When it works for hundreds of people, if not billions of people.

That's what "normal people" means.

They might have a hard time with this one. Maybe the 3k price tag means they will release something with close to the processing power of a PC but I doubt it. Most of that cost is probably in the display they’re using plus the brand. That’s going to have a hard time competing with existing headsets that can tether to a gaming PC. The price alone will put them in a niche market where they’ll be competing with Varjo and Pimax which already have products with equivalent or better displays. Apple would have the advantage of being standalone but that is also a big disadvantage when it comes to gaming or wanting to upgrade hardware.

Nah, they'll just cripple the graphics, gaslight everyone into claiming it's better, strongarm tmsc into giving them exclusive access to the next node, and then claim that their gpu design is literal magic.

Plus it will probably break if you get a hair stuck in it or accelerate at over 0.1g, and everyone will blame the user for wearing it wrong when it happens.

so what’s on your wishlist right now?

VR is the "supersonic jet airliner" of computing. It will never be a thing. Give it a rest, sometimes technology is complete and doesn't need to be "disrupted" anymore.

Sorry, you’re wrong on this. If you’ve actually spent significant time on the hardware and software that is getting it right then you would know. The problem is that there is a lot of experimental hardware and software getting it wrong but that’s to be expected in the early stages of any new technology. Go find someone that has a good VR setup which is either a valve index or a quest 2 connected to a high end gaming PC and play a few rounds of Pavlov on the weekend when everyone is online. Check out habie147 on YouTube for some decent reviews of good VR games.

Flying the Concorde was also really sweet, I heard people tell. That's not the point. I'm sure the technology for VR is kickass and the games are great, but nobody wanted or asked for "disruption" in the videogame space. (Except people who get a rush of "disrupting" things for "disruption"'s sake.)

>I'm sure the technology for VR is kickass and the games are great, but nobody wanted or asked for "disruption" in the videogame space.

Nobody ever asked for disruption... that's why it's called disruption. But it turns out that VR never really disrupted games anyways. It just created a new category. Most people don't care about VR and have just continued playing normal games that are already expensive enough. VR has just added to the pie, not taken a slice.

Games are only the surface here but for me at least VR games are the only ones I play now. My steam library had been gathering dust for a few years since I had started to see the endless grind of modern games as nothing but a time sink, they had lost their flavour.

With VR and multiplayer it’s opened an entirely new world of immersive and emergent gameplay. I’ve had more fun playing silly custom maps in Pavlov than I’ve had in decades of traditional gaming.

I wouldn’t call VR a disruptor so much as a replacement for current displays and an addition of a new form of human interface device. People will probably still play pancake games in 10 years time using a keyboard and mouse or a game controller but they’ll be wearing a headset so they can have their game displayed at whatever size and fov they find optimal. There will also be a huge number of VR games and gamers and probably also a lot of mixed games where you can play in either VR or on a (virtual) screen.

>VR is the "supersonic jet airliner" of computing. It will never be a thing.

Someday VR will be there. It's not physically impossible. Supersonic passenger travel will never be efficient because aerodynamic drag exists. VR just needs a few generations of slimming down the hardware, innovating on control input, and streamlining the software. In 20 years we'll probably be in a place where eyeglass form factor full FOV AR/VR is a thing.

At this point it's easier to solve aerodynamic drag than it is to continue making hardware slimmer.

It's like 3D video, it has come back 3 times in my life time, "this time for real " and it always ends up being a fad.

I still think that while VR wont get mainstream, AR will deffinitely do.

> I kinda feel like VR is still in the "Should I get an Amiga? Or an Atari? Or a TRS80? Or a ZX81? Or an Apple II?" stage.

Exactly, we are still in early days for VR. Many of the annoying things will get better.

As a reminder for people reading this, the TRS80 & co came out around 1977. PCs reached ubiquity around 1995-1997, I would say (mass introduction in offices and schools around the world - not only in developed countries; mass purchases for at home, both for work/homework and for fun). So that would mean around 20 years.

And back then we had Moore's Law on our side.

So truly mainstream VR might be 20+ years from now.

I used my Quest 1 a lot, and had to buy another one when it stopped working (during COVID, sigh) because it was so much a part of my daily lifestyle. The Quest 2 is even better, and I got custom prescription lenses just for my VR system that solves the problem of comfort with glasses.

But I only use my VR system for fitness, and only a few fitness oriented or active apps. It is the killer but only VR app for me.

I don't think the Go was a very good product. Facebook was right to double/triple down on the Quest, but that does leave early adopters a bit in a mess with outdated hardware (although I'm on my third quest system already).

What VR games / apps do you use to keep in shape?

For me it's Supernatural [1]. It's a bit expensive ($15/month, paid annually), but it's worth every cent. It has the same polish of Peloton (with instructors, curated musical set, decent mobile app companion, etc), with the advantage that it gets your brain laser focused on what you're doing (as opposed to any other form of exercise, where I put my headphones on and tune out on a podcast, YT video or something).

It's similar to the feeling I get when I'm coding and in the flow: time stops, and I can't think of anything else. And this is coming from someone who always hated exercise, so it has been a pretty fantastic experience so far (~1 year). But YMMV.

ps: if interested, I have 4 free guest passes (it gives you 30 days free trial, instead of the normal 7). Email in my profile.

pps: strongly recommend Quest2 with extended battery (or counterweight [2]), so the weight is more evenly distributed in your head. I had some neck pain at first, until I replaced by the elite strap with extra battery.

[1] https://www.getsupernatural.com/

[2] https://vrbalance.net/

I’m extremely sceptical of fitness For VR, at least with the current hardware available.

- sweaty and nasty as hell on the headset - no substitute for a proper gym or run or swim, there only so much stuff you can do on the ground or punching the air, jogging on the spot - conditions you to only be active in VR, which coddles you in an environment that does not mirror real world applications of your body

Im happy to be debunked but those are my impressions. I’m very fit, frequently go to my nearby boxing gym, i just couldn’t see myself doing this

Have you tried it yet? I’m skeptical for the same reasons but telling myself to not judge something before I’ve tried it. After all, my prior should be “do other humans find this useful” and I’m probably not all that unique.

I respect your skepticism; exercise in VR is certainly not for everyone. If gym works for you and you have the time to go several times per week, great. Just sharing that VR works for me (and apparently some other hardcore users [2]).

FWIW, sweat is solved problem; there's plenty of silicone covers [1], sweat bands, etc. And the parent also mentioned of wearing glasses, but prescription lenses are widely available (I use these ones [3]).

I'm just puzzled by your comment of "doesn't mirror real world applications of your body"; as if boxing, squats and cardio in general weren't "real world" :)

[1] https://us.vrcover.com/collections/silicone-covers

[2] https://www.facebook.com/groups/getsupernatural/

[3] https://www.framesdirect.com/virtuclear-lens-inserts-for-ocu...

> I'm just puzzled by your comment of "doesn't mirror real world applications of your body"; as if boxing, squats and cardio in general weren't "real world" :)

It depends, a bit, what your fitness goals are.

If you're doing squats because you want to be able to lift 100 lbs boxes confidently, or boxing because you want to fistfight in the real world, you might be limited by the fact VR can't provide resistance; detect if you're putting enough force in; or punch back.

On the other hand, if you're looking to get your heart and lungs going, burn some calories, and generally compensate for the fact you've been sitting at a desk all day? Anything from ballet to bodybuilding will do, including VR exercise.

Oh sure, VR is a good replacement for cardio exercises. It definitely does not substitute weight lifting in general.

The hardware is the least of their problems. I had never heard of this before so I looked at the website and saw their pitch.

It basically looks like simple movements repeated over and over. Because all you have is 2 controllers. There’s no way to add complexity or load because that would just be dangerous if you can’t see your surroundings.

Seeing your surroundings generally wont be an issue as most VR rigs have external cameras. It’s that the software for such “augmented reality” isn’t there yet - the cameras today are mostly for boundary/guardian setting.

My impression of supernatural from the website is that they are showing you exotic locations, not your living room. So you won’t be seeing your surrounds during normal play. Is this wrong?

Correct; it does not use the pass-through camera, so you can't see your surroundings (in fact no Oculus app does; it's only used for safety, if it detects a human or a pet entering your space, or if you get too close to the room boundaries you've defined).

In practice, moving around is not a problem, provided you have some minimal space around you (they recommend a 7ft diameter circle). I use their workout mat [1], which is perfect to give you a sense of where you are in the room at all times. I've also successfully used for exercise in hotel rooms when travelling (a bit more challenging, depending on the layout).

[1] https://shop.getsupernatural.com/products/vr-workout-mat

A lot of fitness games don’t involve moving. One of the reasons I don’t play thrill of the fight is that I don’t really have space for it. But fitXR and best saver are stationary.

> There’s no way to add complexity or load because that would just be dangerous if you can’t see your surroundings.

Definitely don't do this in your living room with your three year old toddler around (as I learned very quickly :) ).

You have to add your own load (or "weight") to your movements, it won't work if you are just out to win the game with minimal energy expenditure (which the software won't really penalize you for).

I recently bought a Quest for fitness as well, and while I was a bit unsure, I'm fairly convinced. (For reference, I lift weights about 4 times a week. I play basketball once a week or so, but don't do much other cardio, which is the hole that I was looking to fill.)

It's worth asking what your goal is though. If it's only to burn calories, what matters is a mix of intensity and how long you do the activity. Walking for two hours burns more calories than running for 10 minutes. So through that lens, a game that has you moving only a bit, but that you will play for an hour, is a pretty good idea.

If you don't have that much time, or your goal is more health-focused in that you want to get your heart rate up, there are definitely games that make that happen. A boxing game is considered the gold standard, but there are other games that definitely make me sweat.

All in all, it's an activity I enjoy doing, and that I can do every day without leaving the house, which for my specific situation is exactly what I needed.

> - sweaty and nasty as hell on the headset

It isn't that bad with the silicon wrap around the eye piece. Keeping your headset clean is a simple wipe down after each session.

> there only so much stuff you can do on the ground or punching the air, jogging on the spot

The "game" aspect allows for long sessions of punching things in the air, dunking, and some knee movements (no running in place yet). You also have to psychologically charge your punches or your slashes to add weight to them (otherwise you aren't getting much out of it).

> which coddles you in an environment that does not mirror real world applications of your body

Real world application of my body is programming 8 hours a day. I'll take an hour of shadow boxing a day even if I won't be able to apply it at work (thankfully).

You really do have to give it a serious try though. If you aren't enthusiastic about it, it probably won't work for you, and even if you want to try it, it doesn't guarantee that it will work for you.

Thrill of the fight is an amazing game for that. I’ve collapsed in a pile of sweat after a decently short time.

Expect to have sore shoulders/back after throwing a few thousand air punches as hard as you can.

I suspect your form is bad, which you would know if you had a proper trainer.

I'm not sure how it detects how hard a punch is, but I suspect form (or the closest approximation it can detect) is a significant factor.

But honestly, it's not real boxing it's a boxing themed cardio exercise. At a purported 10-15 calories a minute it seems like a pretty good cardio workout as well.

My form is fine, it’s just that swinging as hard as you can i to air many times is going to take its toll.

Mostly FitXR. I shied away from Supernatural because they asked for a credit card off device on a website. Beat Saber is always good for some fun, though you won't sweat as much as in FitXR (but also, you can play it for longer, so its a wash if you have time). I also use Les Mills Bodycombat sometime, it has better variation in movement, but still not as intense as the FitXR content I'm used to (if I want a cooldown, its a wash between that and Beat Saber).

Unless getting in and out of VR becomes as easy as putting one and taking off a pair of sunglasses, it's never going to become mainstream. Some serious disruption is going to be required to get there.

Compare it to the PDAs (e.g., Palm Pilot) of the late 90s early 2000s. They were cool, but hard to use. Though they were popular, they were far from mainstream. Then the iPhone came out, and a few years later everybody had a computer in their pocket. VR sorely needs a similar disruption.

I used to have a Newton, I tried developing for it in college. It was terrible but I learned so much from it. It was one of those things where everybody had to tell you how dumb you were to have it or use it. I had a similar experience with smart watches and believe it or not the first generation Samsung Note. I remember someone telling me I was ridiculous to have such a "big phone".

I don't know which thing will work out and which won't, but people telling you why they won't or will never use it is not that meaningful to me. I have seen too many things in my life that people say they will never use become quite common. I have always had my best successes on new technologies so I am always rooting for people trying to create new hardware.

FWIW I love my Quest 2 and use it every day. Your mileage will vary.

Frankly I'd pay out the nose for a flagship phone with a 16:10 screen like the original Note.

https://www.amazon.com/TCL-Unlocked-Smartphone-Triple-Camera...

looks decent

That's a 20:9 display and an SoC that was hot garbage when it was new two years ago.

The Note4 was the best phone I ever had as it had: 1. Large screen 2. Didn't really need a case as it didnt have curved glass 3. had a plastic back with texturing for grip / metal frame 4. Easily replacable battery, could pop off the back in a second. 5. Sd card 6. The pen was cool

When I say it it didn't need a case, I dropped that phone many times, and the screen never cracked due to the metal rim. In the end as os update bricked it. Went to an s8 which was slippery as could be, with its glass back. Cracked both sides and short order, and from there on out I've needed a bulky case to wrap my delicate flower of a phone.. Damn.

I am in complete agreement. My Note 4 had by far the best smartphone display I've ever used. 2560x1440 with zero screen wasted on camera or navigation buttons. I keep mine in a display cabinet and every few months take it out and enjoy just how huge the screen looks despite the fact I can hold it vertically in one hand. Dropping a spare battery in my pocket for a day hike when I'm going to run the GPS for hours. MHL giving me lag-free HDMI-out with charging. True mass-storage USB mode where I can copy files and navigate the folder structure at the same time. I used mine until the screen was so yellow it looked like I dipped it in popcorn grease.

In 2015, Huawei had the Honor X2, a 7 inch, 16:10 screen phone.

I'd happily buy one again if it had modern specs.

https://m.gsmarena.com/huawei_mediapad_x2-7075.php

I have one of those big phones with 6inch+ screen (they're pretty mainstream these days) and I wish I had something smaller. Hard af to use with single hand and screen is still pretty small for comfortably reading anything or consuming media (you have to hold it very close to your face for too long to be comfortable). Wish I had bought something cheaper and smaller and gotten a tablet with the extra money I saved. I'm buying a tablet anyways now.

>Unless getting in and out of VR becomes as easy as putting one and taking off a pair of sunglasses

In my opinion it already is. I have an OQ2 and play whatever the golf simulator is, and a sailboat simulator in it all the time, but it's exactly the type of quick, 2-3 minute sessions that used to be mobile games or tiktok. From lifting my laptop off of my laptop to starting a race in the sailboat game takes less than a minute, and almost all of that is just load times on the game.

(The sailing game is marineverse, btw. Lots of fun when its 115 degrees out in Phoenix and too hot to go on real water)

It's really not if you wear glasses.

I don't, wife does, it's always a production for her.

Get prescription lenses, they’re like $80

Add one more thing to the long list of VR tech hurdles.

But i don’t wear glasses. So getting prescription lenses is just one more thing to deal with for when my wife wants to play beat Sabre.

Buy her a Quest for her birthday, I’m just trying to provide helpful suggestions here. I just use the included spacer and it works fine with my glasses and is quick to change out give that a shot.

I don't believe VR going mainstream is really the point. And also why Meta's approach feels off to me. Even when you read Cyberpunk literature, the concept of a cyber decker is as rare as a modern day hacker.

As for the Ready Player One experience. There is a different issue to be addressed and that is the finite experience offered by modern day "games." Taking a look at Diablo Immortal and it should be clear of what little runway there is to live your life in VR. Experiences extended by lootboxes.

Even games that don't use that mechanism are bloated through artificial grinds. Economy resets and just lack of budget for story outside of 80hrs. Why even sink the development time in if you have the former to fuel profit margins?

There's a lot more to be said inside the scope of what XR is and how it will impact. And its not just comfort or accessibility preventing adoption. There is no killer app and it's the same with crypto. But that's more to do with the current limits of concepts we have relied on to get to this point.

Social VR aka “The Metaverse” doesn’t need loot boxes and fake internet points to be compelling. Those are tricks that devs use to hook you on an otherwise very underwhelming experience. Social VR has real people with voices and body language and that’s pretty much all you need. You can add activities like movie screens and party games as ice breakers but they aren’t necessary. The most used feature in social VR apps is a mirror.

I think our games have a too coarse grained degree of simulation.

The problem is that you want different levels of simulation at different times so developers just pick the easiest one to implement that is still fun. If there is an MMORPG you might want the ability to simulate actual cooking but at some point it becomes a grind and you just want to press a button instead of repeating the same recipe over and over again.

It’s more than just the ability to get in or out of VR — VR has space requirements for most applications; even if you’re standing still, you’ll need space around you for your arms to move. VR, in part, is a real estate problem.

I have a headset I bought a few years ago (PSVR), and while it’s easy enough to set up, I don’t want to rearrange my living room every time I use it.

This is mostly solved by going wireless which allows you to use your headset anywhere you have space. A lot of experiences are designed to work while seated or in very limited space as well. It is a bummer if you don’t have enough room for the really active experiences though but in my experience that’s the minority.

> This is mostly solved by going wireless which allows you to use your headset anywhere you have space.

I think you're missing what I'm saying: while I have space, the space I have requires some effort to make VR-ready. Wireless is interesting (I can use it in my backyard, for example), but that comes with its own set of caveats.

The minute, someone uses VR to gain/master skills 5x-10x times faster than regular users, everyone will switch to VR.

The minute, enterprises use VR to improve productivity, everyone will switch to VR.

I'm always astounded by the lack of imagination from smart people that they get so fixated on small things while completely missing the bigger picture.

That's how you end up with Grammar Nazis, REST Nazis, TDD Nazis, Security Nazis, Code Format Nazis.

Make no mistake, society needs people who are obsessed or paranoid about little things, but they aren't the ones you look up to or go to for next generation advances.

So, as usual I'll take any HN future prediction with grain of salt and stick to people who have created Trillion $ companies or built products used by Billions.

>The minute, someone uses VR to gain/master skills 5x-10x times faster than regular users, everyone will switch to VR. I have little doubt that this is the killer VR app that we just haven't found a way to deploy yet - Imagine, say, an auto manufacturer issuing a digital twin of their vehicle to mechanics that includes walkthroughs for each maintenance procedure. The scaffolding on both the production and consumption sides which would be necessary to support this are significant, though.

A mechanic can read a repair manual much faster than watching a walkthrough.

He isn't going to watch a walkthrough he is going to repair it in VR. Learning by doing.

AR for some mechanics is probably helpful in one way or the other.

But when you create a digital twin for traingin, VR or AR, it will be easier to teach a robot to do that job without any human. It might be that VR/AR is a short intermediate step, but robots are the future.

And i' still waiting for the master skill application. Were is it? What is it? Why does the lizard talk about tech stuff in his video only and not about what you will do with it? Guess why?

Full body tracking without extra equipment and much better hand tracking are on their way. Those are the keys to unlocking a lot of skill training. The other big hurdle is just building the software, someone with domain knowledge has to create Electrician Simulator 2023. Industry is doing this right now in a few areas, wider adoption will increase that pace.

I do see the industry training use cases.

But i think it will end up like 3d printing: Fun and niche for nerds and the professional versions are better and more expensive and only yused for their usecases.

s/The Minute/If

And even then, not so many people care about being productive or to master new skills.

once again, you are underestimating the potential.

When I say skills you are limiting your imagination drudge-work skills. Skills could also be Tennis, Dancing, Sex, Golf.

Productivity could also be fixing your car, bikes, plumbing.

VR is one of the few technologies which both lazy and active people can benefit.

Unless you put yourself in the category of a neck-beard who doesn't like moving from your lazy-boy and also don't like porn, the category of people who won't benefit from real-life VR is very tiny.

Once something benefits them, People will jump through all kinds of hoops to get them

I don't think I underestimate the tech. People were predicting mainstream flying cars by the year 2000s

I think tech bros are way overestimating the interest of people in general. Nobody's going to train for sex or sport in VR, it lacks 90% of the experience.

People want to live real world thing, not evolve in a virtual world alone with appendices that barely mimic real life sensations.

Flying cars depends on massive capital spending on infrastructure, manufacturing to build a thing only the top 1% ile can afford. Not to mention massive changes to law. There is also a big binary chasm to cross (fly as safe an airplanve vs not)

A $300 VR headset has none of those barriers and is open to millions of developers and can constantly iterate.

Understand the difference and you'll become a better investor.

Else you are just falling for the Availability Heuristic Fallacy

Even as an enthusiast (5 headsets and counting) I have to agree. There have been several month periods where I didn’t use VR due to driver instability.

That being said, body tracking is what made the platform click for me. Hanging out with friends from all over the world in an immersive space feels like the future.

It's really popular with kids and at least one of my uncles, I couldn't be so fast to dismiss it the quest2 clicks with a lot of people

VR also... isn't that immersive

I'm a huge VR nerd, I love collecting headsets and playing with new ways to display visuals. But I've never thought it would be a mainstream product, because of exactly what you said: you have to strap something to your head

It really isn't that immersive. Once you are into the game or story it doesn't matter whether you are reading a book, watching a TV or viewing it through VR. You get immersed regardless

My main interest in VR is playing with the idea of replacing my monitors for coding, graphic design and 3D modelling. 3D modelling in VR is already very good and better than a screen due to the hand-tracking and being able to easily manipulate directly in 3D space (not the immersive display, so much)

Which 3d modeling apps do you use? I am interested in this space.

I still use my Quest 1 every day. Honestly no idea what you're even referring to here.

My bad, I meant the Oculus Go.

Go you can still use just fine too. I watch movies on mine from time to time. They unlocked the bootloader last year so you can do whatever you want with for years to come.

this is like henry ford's "whatever color you want"

its unlocked, but all the new proprietary VR apps are not going to be backwards compatible with it.

(not to drag it too much, I hope to be working on the open source side of the metaverse, but I think OP has a point about forward compatibility, there's very little reason to throw down good money for another headset with a limited lifespan, we're still in that early adoption / fast trash phase)

Nothing would be compatible with it anyway. It’s too slow and it only has a single controller with only 3 degrees of freedom. It’s not a VR problem or even a proprietary problem, just rapid improvement.

The Go existing at all was probably a mistake. It was a good test bed but it was always headed for immediate deprecation, it could’ve just stayed in the lab.

To this day the Go is actually one of my favorite headsets, and I have owned many. The small controller and form factor are great for travel and I can comfortably watch a movie with it on the plane, which can't be said for most headsets. That said, whilst it is a great device for watching movies, that is really all it was ever good for.

For instance, my Rift 2’s left controller died for unknown reasons and Meta has been “out of stock” for a year on this part and the Rift 1 controller is “discontinued”. You can’t even find it on ebay. $500 out the window.

Not entirely fair. The Quest is a joy to use.

But I will admit that even though each time I take off the dust from my Quest I am wowed at the experience,

... each time I take off the headset I shrug and I'm like "cool".

Maybe we just need to come to grips with the fact that _as an entertainment or work_ device, it's friggin awesome - and as far as "reality" goes, it's pointless.

Now of course if it came to a point where you don't want to remove the headset.. but thankfully personally I don't have any worries.

A funny philosophical thought.. you reproduce the sense of smell, taste .. etc... Then people will be like, "umm, it's just like my real life now.. what is the point?" Other than being "transported" (for fake) and experience another place.

I think that's the main misconception with VR. There is the dream of "living another life". But it's just entertainment.

edit: I should also add that despite promising stories in the media, the ability of VR to heal trauma, to heal our nervous system, to make us better people... is still very much up in the air.. and as I am healing trauma myself I can see how VR could just as well unbalance the nervous system. I mean you're already seeing how "novelty" messes us up in social media (inifinite scroll etc)... why should we expect VR to make everything betteR?

Exactly, the Quest is by far the best experience on that front. That's coming from someone who started with an Oculus DK1.

The Valve Index is pretty amazing. You can adjust for Pupillary Distance as well as inward and out for comfort with glasses of all sizes. I doubt if Steam or Valve are going anywhere anytime soon. I recommend it. 144hz screens.

Yeah, the hassle of having to put it on and store it somewhere is gonna be hard to get over. The thing with a tv and video games is you just plop yourself on the couch and go. You don’t have to grab the tv from the closet and put it on.

The other issue is even if people are open to the VR device itself, I think you absolutely have to nail the experience for them the first time or else people will treat it like a fad and then never give it a go again. You don’t have a second chance to make a good impression.

> The people who bought a headset and phone to use Samsung VR got fucked. The people who bought a headset and a Google Daydream-certified phone got fucked. The people who bought an Oculus Go got fucked.

These things were all essentially experiments, or at best a little taster of VR for those not ready to invest in serious (PC-based) VR. Decent VR needs a truckload of GPU power, and these early attempts to use phone hardware for VR were never going to be much good.

I can use my Oculus Go apps (like my beloved 'Race for the Galaxy') on the Oculus Quest (and perhaps there's a way to run it on the Quest2). I can still use my Google Daydream VR set, but there is no real use case for it (except, like with samsung gearVR underwater VR with a watertight phone). Most if not all apps of these early mobile VR systems have been ported to the Oculus Go, which has superior hardware compared to GearVR (and weighs less then the Quest). There are probably useful apps or good games on Go that haven't been backported to Samsung GearVR, but seriously - the Go is much more comfortable to wear then the bulky GearVR. 250 euro is a lot, but I gladly paid it for a bit more comfort. Why still use Daydream or GearVR? SteamVR apps can still be run on Windows11 and streamed to Oculus Quest. What do you mean with

VR being a pain in the ass is VR's problem.

Making it indistinguishable from real life should be easy then.

Steam has somewhat sorted the backwards compatibility.

Hooking up a Quest 2 to Steam works well and it means that you have a platform that will support numerous headsets.

Where that leaves Meta though is an interesting question.

I figured VR would bring back arcades.

New equipment may be too expensive and novel for home purchases, but an arcade could invest in those fancy omnidirectional treadmill and VR gloves.

The demand is there. People pay $30+ for a spin class, why not VR lightsaber zumba?

Video games in the 80s and movies started off in commercial locations before becoming cheap enough for home use. I'm not sure why VR hasn't followed their model. I've assumed it was because the tech isn't there yet.

> People pay $30+ for a spin class, why not VR lightsaber zumba?

Believe it or not but a lot of people go to group sport to be surrounded by people, not to be alone in a virtual world.

Putting your hands on a greasy controller is one thing, strapping a sweaty headset to your face is quite another.

f$*ked oculus rift user here:

Their drivers caused what has probably been the only windows bluescreens I've seen in a decade.

Then because they can't provide individual downloadable versions (or for that matter even recover them from their build artifacts, per support) anytime something breaks following an update your SOL until they fix it, if ever. (this is part of a larger dark pattern of creating "installers" that actually are only downloaders that download whatever version is current and install it without saving the downloaded image).

I'm in the situation where about a year and a half ago they pushed an update which broke my setup, and they can't seem to fix it, nor are they apparently motivated. The solution is basically buy a new computer/reinstall the OS/whatever and see if that fixes it. I'm not the only one, reddit is full of people having various problems like this, and some have even gone so far as to create restore point style scripts for saving/restoring the install.

Their USB drivers have been trash, or they have some requirement that isn't clear, which means that its a game of plugging in the headset and sensors into random USB ports until it decides everything is going to work (maybe).

I could go on, but their software people obviously aren't up to the task of providing kernel mode code, or debugging problems in the field.

Funny bit, one of their recruiters poped me an email shortly after I gave up on their software/support teams actually being capable of fixing things. Right into the trash it went, I can't imagine working for a dev shop that can't even recover older versions of their build artifacts to do a/b testing.

Same. In a few decades I'm going to look up the obituaries of the Oculus Home software dev team and savor reading about them dying. It says the headset is connected despite showing an amber light, it refuses to play audio from the headset instead of the pc speakers, it refuses to set up the play area without having a PC monitor facing the play area, it makes you reset the play area every time so much as a housefly fart touches a camera.

I was so mad for a while, I considered taking them to small claims court to recover the price of the games, since they broke it, and have basically refused to fix it.

Right now its just in the category of "never give meta/etc money for anything because they will f$*k you and never blink" I don't do bus with google, and I won't do bus with facebook, they are just to big to notice when they squash people like me.

It's comfort and convenience that VR lacks most.

Until VR headsets are as light and unobtrusive as ordinary glasses, VR will remain niche.

I don’t think they have to go that far. How often do you lug a laptop around with you or work with one on your lap or what about the money and floor space you put into having a workstation set up in your home? As much as Apple keeps trying, it’ll be a long time before laptops are as light and easy to use as a piece of paper and a pencil but that isn’t stopping anyone from using them. VR just needs to be more ergonomic, that’s it.

I use it very often to view google streetview. Static images don't cause nausea. I think i ve already gotten enough return for my investment and they keep shipping new updates all the time (last one was quite buggy).

I mean, I think there's a secondary problem. Even if it _wasn't_ a pain in the ass, does anyone want it? I mean, clearly some people do, but a significant number? I've used a VR headset a few times, and it was a deeply unpleasant experience, but even if you address the main sources of unpleasantness (bulky, extremely fiddly to set up, dreadful software) it was still, well... a pretty pointless experience, in my view. Even if the tech improves I wouldn't be keen to revisit.

Honestly, I kind of suspect it's this decade's 3D TV; enormous hype, quickly followed by the whole industry pretending they were never involved in it.

VR will be a dud for a long time. We need a lot of tech advancements and then we need an actual business model (i.e. killer app).

AR is the real deal for the immediate future. AR has direct applications in a lot of environments.

To put it shortly, AR is something that will be truly useful within the next 5-10 years, VR is something will be truly useful within the next 20-25 years.

AR definitely (already) has specialized industrial applications. I think it's _somewhat_ less clear that there's a mass-market consumer product there, though.

How so? It's incredibly clear :-)

Once we get the tech to actually put it into glasses properly, it will be ubiquitous.

Google Glass failed because the tech wasn't there yet, smart glasses need to look like regular glasses. Once they do, then of course everyone will want it. For anyone willing to wear glasses, smart glasses are basically the smartphone killer (or enhancer).

VR is the odd one out for mass-market consumer products. Flight simulators and the like don't cut it as "mass-market".

What defines mass market? Meta has sold over 15 million Quest 2 units in the past two years.

In that time they’ve debatably eclipsed the entire VR headset industry units sold over the past decade - about 10 million mostly PSVR, but some Samsung, Vive and Valve.

The PS5 has sold 20 million, for reference.

Well, that's a good question.

I think it's complicated.

First of all, I don't really know a lot of people talking about and using VR. So the first thing would be to check real adoption. There are a ton of famous products that were purchased in large quantities and then only collected dust.

PS5 for sure doesn't suffer from that. Quest 2... the jury might still be out.

The second thing is, PS5 is famous by being hamstrung by supply issues. PS4 sold almost 120 million units, and for sure it wasn't abandoned in some corner of the house.

The third thing would be the ecosystem. Number of titles, their sales, the overall market value, when including the platforms themselves and the products sold on top of them.

My impression so far is that VR is still far from mainstream. It's very loved by enthusiasts but it's not at the late adopter or laggard stage, it hasn't crossed the chasm (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossing_the_Chasm).

I'm pretty salty about my Oculus Go experience. I only found a tiny handful of good games on the platform, then it died.

Sorry to hear that but give the Quest 2 a shot. It’s not going anywhere and is a big target for developers.

Can you tell me how the people who bought oculus go get tucked? I thought it’s supported actively, no?

I don't quite get why people are so hyped about VR. A novel experience, sure. Something to be "in" everyday, I'm not sure. And what about R [0], which we already have, and way better than VR, anyone?

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enMwwQy_noI

It has an amazing potential in gaming. For example, racing, which in R is too expensive for the majority, while the computer simulations are so close to reality, that the VR ads to the experience.

It is also used by architects when designing buildings and different spaces, so it can also be used in professional environment.

On the other hand, I think that all the meta thing is just corporate hype blown out of proportions. I can imagine tho that for some people their R isn't that great, or they will never have a chance to experience certain places in the world in first person. My 90 years old great-grandmother can experience Iceland only through TV documentaries, google street view or maybe VR.

Where are all these people who are so hyped about VR they want to spend every day "in" it? Maybe some of these people exist, but I don't think they exist in anywhere near the numbers they seem to exist in people's imaginations.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com