5 ms·

Odd that the twitchy front page of /r/Oculus made it's way on the front page here, but I'll echo the ever-present Oculus founder's response that addressing this

by FLGMwt 11y ago

Odd that the twitchy front page of /r/Oculus made it's way on the front page here, but I'll echo the ever-present Oculus founder's response that addressing this is pretty high on their roadmap. Sauce: https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/4bd31n/oculus_software_and_vr_applications_must_be/d18dw80 https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/4bd31n/oculus_softw...

hiddencost 11y ago
Palmer said that fixing it was nontrivial. I wonder if that's "nontrivial because all software needs to be tested carefully even though it's just adding a configurable path" or "nontrivial for reason that are deep into OS fundamentals"?
- joeld42 11y ago
  My guess would be that once you allow something other than C:, you're opening things up to running games off of all kinds of weird devices like external USB drives, flash sticks, weird legacy hardware, network drives. This makes the problem of streaming assets a lot more challenging. Some techniques, like mmap'ing resources in, might require a NTFS formatted drive. Limiting you to running off the system drive sidesteps a lot of those problems, and lets you make certain assumptions (e.g. it's probably NTFS and reasonably fast). Also, drives that are not C: tend to disappear and reappear relatively frequently. Having a launcher have to check and handle it semi-gracefully is not simple. If you make people keep things on C:, they are more likely to stick around.
  - ygra 11y ago
    > e.g. it's probably NTFS It has to be since Vista.
- jxdjsks 11y ago
  I really cant see a reason for this. I would be quite surprised if there was a reason for this other than, the original developer/s working on the software/installer were inexperienced and didn't consider installing to a secondary drive important. Once you've made a decision like this at the outset it can be quite awkward to undo, the hard coding kind of leaks its way into lots of different corners of the appliction.
agnivade 11y ago
good lord .. he is saying its non-trivial ! Can't imagine software created by such companies to have stupid hardcodings like these..

by FLGMwt 11y ago

hiddencost 11y ago

Palmer said that fixing it was nontrivial. I wonder if that's "nontrivial because all software needs to be tested carefully even though it's just adding a configurable path" or "nontrivial for reason that are deep into OS fundamentals"?

joeld42 11y ago
My guess would be that once you allow something other than C:, you're opening things up to running games off of all kinds of weird devices like external USB drives, flash sticks, weird legacy hardware, network drives. This makes the problem of streaming assets a lot more challenging. Some techniques, like mmap'ing resources in, might require a NTFS formatted drive. Limiting you to running off the system drive sidesteps a lot of those problems, and lets you make certain assumptions (e.g. it's probably NTFS and reasonably fast). Also, drives that are not C: tend to disappear and reappear relatively frequently. Having a launcher have to check and handle it semi-gracefully is not simple. If you make people keep things on C:, they are more likely to stick around.
- ygra 11y ago
  > e.g. it's probably NTFS It has to be since Vista.
jxdjsks 11y ago
I really cant see a reason for this. I would be quite surprised if there was a reason for this other than, the original developer/s working on the software/installer were inexperienced and didn't consider installing to a secondary drive important. Once you've made a decision like this at the outset it can be quite awkward to undo, the hard coding kind of leaks its way into lots of different corners of the appliction.

agnivade 11y ago

good lord .. he is saying its non-trivial ! Can't imagine software created by such companies to have stupid hardcodings like these..