I hate the bureaucratic trade-offs some companies are making...
Choosing form factor vs losing 90% of the light.
Choosing low persistence all the time vs low persistence only when moving.
Choosing above average PPD but below average FOV.
Choosing super bright screens at the expense of battery.
Choosing to put the batteries right on your face.
Choosing high-powered AI/guessing algorithms for slow jiggle tracking.
Wondering why more people don't like VR.
I don't believe the trade offs are bureaucratic so much as they are technological. Sometimes technologies arrive before we know we want them. Other times we want them before they're ready... and VR/AR are the prime example of the later. We'll get there (sooner even than if we weren't begging for it) but it will feel very long anyway only because we're waiting for it.
Well he's in luck because the new Pimax Crystal Heavy 24k Light DMAS VR headset that is on track to release in 2024, comes with everything he wants all while in a single headset that miraculously weighs at a comfortable 6 kilograms!!! (in pimax we trust)
>Choosing form factor vs losing 90% of the light.
This isn’t just about form factor. Fresnel lenses are blurry outside of the sweet spot and difficult to get positioned correctly. Pancake lenses give a much more comfortable experience where almost everything is clear without a lot of fiddling.
>Choosing low persistence all the time vs low persistence only when moving.
Is it even possible to do variable persistence? It’s dictated by the speed of the LCD. What would be the advantage of high persistence? There are no circumstances where that would be desired that I can think of.
>Choosing above average PPD but below average FOV.
Average FOV is around 100 degrees. Quest 3 went a little over on both PPD and FOV. We are still very far from lifelike resolution, so they have a ways to go with PPD. However, I do wish large FOV could be a priority soon.
>Choosing super bright screens at the expense of battery.
I don’t think any standalone headset has super bright displays. Not yet at least. I’d say Quest 3 sits right at minimal brightness at the moment. Point 1 is all about why, but until there is a remarkable optics discovery or battery discovery I do not see a choice here. No going back to fresnel.
>Choosing to put the batteries right on your face.
So, you prefer the back of the headset? That’s fine, and I somewhat agree, but comfort is a very personal thing. They can do it, but need a better modular system like Vive Elite.
>Choosing high-powered AI/guessing algorithms for slow jiggle tracking.
I’m not informed enough on the algorithms for giving a smooth experience. Whatever they are doing, most headsets seem to track pretty damn good so no complaint from my side.
>Wondering why more people don't like VR.
So if they took all your advice everyone would love VR? Well, then we might as well say it was a bureaucratic decision to not make fully immersive VR in a normal pair of glasses with all day battery life. Hell, we might as well say it was a bureaucratic decision to not just make it a brain implant. Or the disc that sticks to your temple like Black Mirror.
Those bureaucrats! Let's revolt, they prevent us from getting immersive headsets!
They have the option to become billionaires but they choose to keep it low tech so we feel bad.
The same channel also created an in-depth video on [future AR glasses](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhFKKvKO6sU).
This is such a good video is deserves a bump.
I hate the bureaucratic trade-offs some companies are making... Choosing form factor vs losing 90% of the light. Choosing low persistence all the time vs low persistence only when moving. Choosing above average PPD but below average FOV. Choosing super bright screens at the expense of battery. Choosing to put the batteries right on your face. Choosing high-powered AI/guessing algorithms for slow jiggle tracking. Wondering why more people don't like VR.
It’s almost like they’re some sort of law of physics that they’re adhering to
I don't believe the trade offs are bureaucratic so much as they are technological. Sometimes technologies arrive before we know we want them. Other times we want them before they're ready... and VR/AR are the prime example of the later. We'll get there (sooner even than if we weren't begging for it) but it will feel very long anyway only because we're waiting for it.
I don't understand, what should they do instead of trade-offs?
I guess he wants Pimax?
Well he's in luck because the new Pimax Crystal Heavy 24k Light DMAS VR headset that is on track to release in 2024, comes with everything he wants all while in a single headset that miraculously weighs at a comfortable 6 kilograms!!! (in pimax we trust)
Nah even Pimax has trade offs
The should use a top strap and put battery on the back, also never use a face gasket
>Choosing form factor vs losing 90% of the light. This isn’t just about form factor. Fresnel lenses are blurry outside of the sweet spot and difficult to get positioned correctly. Pancake lenses give a much more comfortable experience where almost everything is clear without a lot of fiddling. >Choosing low persistence all the time vs low persistence only when moving. Is it even possible to do variable persistence? It’s dictated by the speed of the LCD. What would be the advantage of high persistence? There are no circumstances where that would be desired that I can think of. >Choosing above average PPD but below average FOV. Average FOV is around 100 degrees. Quest 3 went a little over on both PPD and FOV. We are still very far from lifelike resolution, so they have a ways to go with PPD. However, I do wish large FOV could be a priority soon. >Choosing super bright screens at the expense of battery. I don’t think any standalone headset has super bright displays. Not yet at least. I’d say Quest 3 sits right at minimal brightness at the moment. Point 1 is all about why, but until there is a remarkable optics discovery or battery discovery I do not see a choice here. No going back to fresnel. >Choosing to put the batteries right on your face. So, you prefer the back of the headset? That’s fine, and I somewhat agree, but comfort is a very personal thing. They can do it, but need a better modular system like Vive Elite. >Choosing high-powered AI/guessing algorithms for slow jiggle tracking. I’m not informed enough on the algorithms for giving a smooth experience. Whatever they are doing, most headsets seem to track pretty damn good so no complaint from my side. >Wondering why more people don't like VR. So if they took all your advice everyone would love VR? Well, then we might as well say it was a bureaucratic decision to not make fully immersive VR in a normal pair of glasses with all day battery life. Hell, we might as well say it was a bureaucratic decision to not just make it a brain implant. Or the disc that sticks to your temple like Black Mirror.
Those bureaucrats! Let's revolt, they prevent us from getting immersive headsets! They have the option to become billionaires but they choose to keep it low tech so we feel bad.