Oculus is already obsolete

[Thick8]

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/164399-avegant-glyph-a-3dvr-headset-that-beams-the-display-directly-onto-your-retina

 

This is what flight sims need.

 

Crap, put this in the wrong place. Will you please move it to "input and output" admin?

Edited December 25, 2013 by Thick8

[cichlidfan]

I would want to hear from someone who has used it before making any guesses as to how useful it would be. It will certainly be worth keeping an eye on when the kickstarter goes live.

[Dr. Yes]

"A disappointing three-hour battery life"

 

Well, that's that. :P

[blksolo]

I think you misread the article,Oculus is Virtual reality,this product is more in the realm of Augmented reality i.e. Google glass. And frankly the whole built in heaphones look kind of ridiculous. I dont think Oculus has anything to worry about.

[KLR Rico]

I'm waiting for galvanic vestibular stimulation or a similar technology to join the party... The feeling of motion is a huge part of flying!

[danilop]

There are no secrets nowadays. Chinese could reverse engineer anything in a couple of weeks, and BTW, 99% of mass market electronics is outsourced there anyway.

 

So basically, we will have stiff competition to Oculus maybe from the day one. There are companies with gazillions in research budget (Sony anyone?) who are just waiting for someone to step in first, probe the VR market and do the hard part.

 

Oculus and underlying technology is too revolutionary to be ignored by big players.

Edited December 25, 2013 by danilop

[redfish]

And frankly the whole built in heaphones look kind of ridiculous. I dont think Oculus has anything to worry about.

 

And wearing the snorkel like scuba gear that "Occulus Rift" is kind of better.....

[redfish]

This one looks like a reference series audiophile headphone set and the head band slipped has just fallen over the users eyes.

Edited December 25, 2013 by redfish

[mhe]

Well, projecting directly onto the retina has a few drawbacks. Like the projected image moving when you move your eyes, which will be pretty annoying in an augmented reality situation. Compensation for this phenomenon would be latency-free eye tracking, a feat nobody has accomplished yet completely, let alone in such a small form factor.

 

It also does not cover your whole field of view. And nothing has been said about the resolution. Or long term health issues by having beams fired onto your retina directly.

 

I'll wait for this tech to mature before passing judgement, but for the moment Oculus has nothing to worry about, especially with them already hinting at 4K resolutions (see recent interviews with Iribe and Carmack for details).

[Thick8]

There are companies with gazillions in research budget (Sony anyone?) who are just waiting for someone to step in first, probe the VR market and do the hard part.

 

Oculus and underlying technology is too revolutionary to be ignored by big players.

 

Sony's had a stereoscopic HMD for years. The newest one uses HD oled displays. Paired with TIR5 you would probably have a rockin setup.

If you'd like to see how un-revolutionary Oculus is go to stereo3d.com. I just hope this one doesn't take the money and run like has happened so many times in the past.

[Tone71]

Oculus is already obsolete? Um, no, no it isn't.

[CyBerkut]

castAR

http://technicalillusions.com/?page_id=197

 

3 modes of use.

 

Projected Augmented Reality - mini-projectors project on to retro-reflective material. You can still see everything else around you that is not covered by the RR material (such as your HOTAS, keyboard, mouse, hands, friends).

 

Augmented Reality - uses a clip-on attachment to redirect the projection to your eyes, while still allowing you to see through the clip-on to view your surroundings. No RR material needed for that mode, and you could potentially use it while moving through the real world (with some common sense and properly designed applications).

 

Virtual Reality - Uses the clip-on attachment again, but with a cover to occlude your view of the outside world.

 

The initial design for the head tracking is based on a camera (above the nose) picking up one, or more IR LED marker pads. The kickstarter was very successful, and supporters should be receiving their production units in the fall of 2014.

 

Among the stretch goals met was to add a gyroscope for additional (inertial) head tracking inputs, and a magnetometer as another input for head tracking.

 

It will be interesting to see if/when T.I. offers a higher resolution version and at what cost. As I understand it, there are currently higher resolution mini-projectors in existence, but they cost considerably more.

 

I backed the castAR Kickstarter, so I'll have that in the fall. I didn't get in on Occulus Rift, as the initial development version didn't look like it would be worth it to me. It's nice to see they are apparently increasing the resolution, and potentially solving the nausea problems many users were experiencing. If that all pans out, I may spring for a Rift too, depending on timing, cost, etc.

 

As for that Avegant Glyph, it will be interesting to see how it pans out.

[cichlidfan]

I backed the castAR Kickstarter, so I'll have that in the fall.

 

Same here.

[whartsell]

Sony's had a stereoscopic HMD for years. The newest one uses HD oled displays. Paired with TIR5 you would probably have a rockin setup.

If you'd like to see how un-revolutionary Oculus is go to stereo3d.com. I just hope this one doesn't take the money and run like has happened so many times in the past.

 

I guess your definition of revolutionary is different than mine. Having a stereo HMD of the quality of the Rift for the price of the rift is quite revolutionary. SHMD for the price of a decent monitor would put it solidly in the consumer realm which has never been done before

[docfu]

Just out of curiosity how would a 55" HDTV 3D television + glasses + trackIR compare to an Occulus rift as it stands? It seems like the TV would have better resolution and no problems with seeing your own controls and the TrackIR should make up for head movement.

 

Or is the rift just on a whole new level?

[Cyb0rg]

Just out of curiosity how would a 55" HDTV 3D television + glasses + trackIR compare to an Occulus rift as it stands? It seems like the TV would have better resolution and no problems with seeing your own controls and the TrackIR should make up for head movement.

 

Or is the rift just on a whole new level?

 

 

 

New level.

 

[Thick8]

Just out of curiosity how would a 55" HDTV 3D television + glasses + trackIR compare to an Occulus rift as it stands? It seems like the TV would have better resolution and no problems with seeing your own controls and the TrackIR should make up for head movement.

 

Or is the rift just on a whole new level?

 

The rift would be more immersive. Yet if they don't raise the resolution to 4K the unit will be still born. I won't play my games at less than 1920x1080 and right now the Oculus has a per eye resolution of 640x720 I think. Word is that will increase but so will the cost.

You won't be able to use your controls but the Oculus isn't made for games that you need a bevy of controls.If you watch the trailers it is designed more for FPS or hack and slash a type games. So if you enjoy the tactile feedback of a more expansive physical controller setup you're out of luck.

I didn't jump on the Castar wagon yet. I will buy it if they use 1080p projectors though.

[Dr. Yes]

I saw a 4K 60" TV at Fry's Electronics today, showing off 4K demo footage, and I really wasn't that impressed. It didn't look much better than 1080p.

[Vedexent]

From the article:

 

Glyph is really a portable media center. This isn’t meant to immerse players in a frantic Quake deathmatch, as Oculus is, nor is it designed for everyday functionality like Glass. Rather, it is an intermediate solution for an intermediate audience.

 

So it's not even the same target market as the rift.

 

And ... let's not forget that most people apparently can't use the rift for an hour without nausea because of the movement lag issues.

 

Drop the latency, raise the resolution, and keep the price point in the high-end monitor range, and the rift has great potential ... but it's not there yet.

[Suchacz]

New level.

 

Yea, I know that vid and I like it. Especialy that girl in pink :D If I could be there I would wish to save her from falling :lol:

 

Sorry, I know that this is forum about flight sims :chair:

 

I saw a 4K 60" TV at Fry's Electronics today, showing off 4K demo footage, and I really wasn't that impressed. It didn't look much better than 1080p.

I have 50" Plasma TV and I am not able to differentiate 720p and 1080p video from my viewpoint, which is 4.5 meters away from the TV. So I doubt that I will be able to do the same for 1080p and 4K, imho in this situation the difference is bellow the retinal resolution of human eyes.

Edited December 28, 2013 by Suchacz

[hannibal]

glyph dont work until there is proper eye tracking

[docfu]

I have 50" Plasma TV and I am not able to differentiate 720p and 1080p video from my viewpoint, which is 4.5 meters away from the TV. So I doubt that I will be able to do the same for 1080p and 4K, imho in this situation the difference is bellow the retinal resolution of human eyes.

 

 

You sit 4.5 meters away from the TV? Wow. I'm running a 37" Sharp LCD and I can clearly make out the pixels at 1.5 meters in 1280x768 (720p, unfortunately it's not 1080p).

 

I think my next tv is going to be the LG 55la6600 (or 55ea6600). Having literally twice the display size of my 37" for games will be hard to complain about. I'm not sure how using windows will be at that resolution though...

[Abburo]

Oculus Rift as well as any other similar device are for now nothing more than gadgets. Nice to have one still not usable all the time.

 

1k resolution for and device like oculus rift I thing it is more than enough. The eye cannot see much difference against a 4k resolution on 7" display. Not the same thing can be said about big screens, where 4k to 18k (IMAX) makes a difference.

[Mnemonic]

1k resolution for and device like oculus rift I thing it is more than enough. The eye cannot see much difference against a 4k resolution on 7" display. Not the same thing can be said about big screens, where 4k to 18k (IMAX) makes a difference.

In the Oculus Rift you look through the optics which blow up 7" screen to the size optically bigger than IMAX screen, so 4k will not be enough for device such as Oculus Rift, not to mention 1k.

[danilop]

They say that optimal resolution for 20/20 vision is something about 2 pixel for arc-minute (healthy human eye have this resolution) which boils down to about 700 pixels per inch for handheld, mobile device and 58 pixels per inch or so for say HD TV watched from 3m distance (that's something slightly bigger than 40" 1080p HDTV)

 

Now do the math, and Mnemonic is right - you need huge resolution for Oculus display to even come close to standard 1080p home theater / computer desktop experience, resolution wise.

Edited December 29, 2013 by danilop