Slightly better resolution but a narrower FOV and worse reflections is not going to turn any HMD from a single digit millions user device into a hundreds of millions of users device. This entire approach is, I think, an evolutionary dead end. People who care about their faces and hair aren't going to strap a 1.5 lb dorkbox to their faces. And no, making it a 1 lb or even an 0.5 lb dorkbox isn't going to fix things if you still have to mash it to your face. People like their faces and won't agree to have their faces look silly for little appreciable gain over a phone and/or laptop.
Ever-increasing improvements aren't required; the eye has a (more or less) fixed resolution. In fact, HMDs with extremely high resolutions already exist, e.g. the Varjo VR-2 Pro and the XR-1, they just cost an arm and a leg. In a few years we'll get them at consumer-level prices instead of having to drop $6-12k.
I'm definitely not the general public, but the biggest factor for me has always been screen resolution, not size or weight. Until HMDs can achieve 8K+ per eye and match the fidelity of a sub-$100 4K monitor, I'm not going to be interested.
Unless they can manage to shrink the headset to the weight of a pair of glasses, I don’t see this as competition for monitors. Just to name one out of dozens of issues: if you have your face supporting a heavy VR mask for hours a day, it’s really going to show after a few years.
I don't think it's a circular argument. Bigscreen VR is already 127 grams. This is doable in the next decade I think. The question is if there's a better form factor than something you wear on your face.
I read that before, and the thing that stuck out to me the most was the need for humongous virtual displays to make the pixel density of the display match that of the HMD.
I'll be honest, I would have trouble doing that. A lot of head movement and aliased fonts - aren't things I'll give up my monitor for.
>And even that won't even get close to 3 physical monitors in terms of resolution, simple because the geometric transforms kill your perfect pixels.
I have 3 physical monitors at $DAYJOB and i don't think i see 1:1 pixels on all three simultaneously - certainly i do for the monitor i'm focusing on, but less so on the others, or maybe only peripheral changes. So i think the HMD could get by with a slightly reduced resolution as long as the FOV accommodated peripheral vision.
I'm incredulous that having a screen strapped half an inch from your eyes for 8+ hours is desirable. I have an Oculus Rift, my face is sweaty/red in a couple of hours and there is an indent around my eyes. I'm sure newer tech can be much better, especially with airflow and an AR set that lets in natural light. We're not there yet, though.
If people wanted to wear a phone screen taped over their eyes out in public, the technical limitations wouldn't barely make a dent in that desire. But the vast majority of people want to have real in-person human interactions when they're out in the world. That's what the makers of these devices fail to see. But they can't see that because they're self-described VR enthusiasts. If they talk to non VR enthusiasts (which is everyone else), they'll see that the limiting factor isn't the hardware.
Think of it this way. Most people think it's rude to talk to each other indoors with sunglasses on. That's the slimmest form factor you're going to get, and it still steps on the toes of human connection.
I just don't know if it'll ever happen, at least not until there are truly massive advances in miniaturization and display tech.
I have much lower spec'd VR goggles and they mostly gather dust. There's just something about having a screen pressed up against your eyes that's weird and uncomfortable in a way that is hard to articulate.
No screen door? Cool! Great motion tracking? Awesome! Premium materials? Eh, OK! But as long as I still need to strap a little box around my eyes with screens in it, I'm going to be limiting my exposure time. My eyes like air, and "better than the competition at all the things" doesn't actually make it solve any real problems I have.
For me, such a thing just can't be more than a toy.
It's essentially impossible with the approach that all of the public AR HMD's are using. Not only that, this approach does not allow for accommodation which is arguably one of the most important things needed for convincing HMD AR.
It’s at a stage with undeniable utility and a possibility to become ubiquitous, but the face hardware problem will need to improve. Ain’t nobody wearing that for a virtual meeting, even though right now the visceral advantages of meeting someone in Oculus are so much better than Zoom.
That's what John Carmack says. He's said that VR headgear needs to get down to swim-goggle size to become mainstream, and down to eyeglass size to become pervasive. He's probably right.
There already exist 1/2 8K VR headsets though (full 16:9 4K per eye), and you can keep seeing a difference there up through around 16K per eye and higher refresh rates than they showed.
Yeah I never said I want VR. I want head mounted displays to free me from bulky & expensive monitors that require lots of desk space and aren't available when travelling with a laptop. And if you can see around the HMD and reach for the coffee cup on the desk without having to look through cameras as you can with the glyph, I consider it a good design. Unfortunately the whole market seems to have developed around multimedia consumption and immersion.
I'd extend that complaint into the wearable display market. We are just now starting to see things like spaceglasses and oculus. But they are all feature heavy either with AR or VR and/or 3D. I've been hoping for a simple head mounted display to replace fixed position 2D monitors for years. Like spaceglasses, but trading all the AR baggage for a higher perceived resolution and lighter package.
There's foveated rendering, but there isn't foveated physical resolution.
With this cutting edge display resolution you can expect a 1-2 monitors QHD of comfortable angular size and that's it.
You could have more out of view but that's your virtual displays.
Then again, why exactly? Getting used to some heavy steamy gadget on your head at home/at work so you can also do that on a train? Get real.
VR goggles always were a gimmick and will be a gimmick on coming decades. I'd bet we'll have non-visual brain datalink before we have non-gimmick VR.
reply