4 ms·

Would pre-Facebook Oculus VR be as obsessed with code signing and attempts at vendor lock-in?

by mmel 11y ago

kirrent 11y ago
The SDK has always been relatively closed even before the Facebook acquisition. They've always touted it as being important for guaranteeing the quality of an experience which I don't necessarily disagree with but its also important for their goal of becoming the biggest VR software platform.
- Tmmrn 11y ago
  Before the facebook acquisition you could download the source code for the SDK and it had cross platform support. After Facebook: Closed Source, Windows-only.
  - coldpie 11y ago
    No, the Oculus server process that does the actual webcam analysis and communication with the HMD and graphics hardware has always been closed.
    - Tmmrn 11y ago
      Yes, but this server application was only introduced with the DK2 and the 0.4.x SDK which was delivered after the facebook acquisition. Whether they would have hold back the source code without facebook - who the hell knows?
      - coldpie 11y ago
        Oh, I didn't know that. I thought the server had been around since the beginning.
      - kirrent 11y ago
        Huh, I didn't know that. I never really had a look at any SDK earlier than that. I just had a false memory that the DK2 came out before the fb acquisition. I do remember Oculus intimating that they couldn't open up the tracking code because it was some proprietary stuff they'd bought but that's almost certainly not the case now.
forrestthewoods 11y ago
If it was projects they owned and paid for? Probably.
drzaiusapelord 11y ago
Oculus from the beginning was fairly big into locking down its ecosystem. I think its clear that it wants an Apple-like level of control where PC gaming turns into a console-like experience. This lock-in benefits them as their store would become the premier outlet for VR sales and Oculus would receive a juicy cut of every VR game sold. Also this would connect to Facebook's social VR ideals of a VR social network and all the privacy issues that come with that. I completely disagree with this philosophy and don't think a simple peripheral should be a wedge into further lock-in in the PC gaming world. I just want to play games, not be a part of some weird Facebook 'trying to stay relevant' agenda or an Oculus 'trying to lock down VR' agenda. Thankfully Valve has spoiled their plans by making a better VR system and an open-ish ecosystem. Valve doesn't pay for exclusives either.

Would pre-Facebook Oculus VR be as obsessed with code signing and attempts at vendor lock-in?

by mmel 11y ago

Would pre-Facebook Oculus VR be as obsessed with code signing and attempts at vendor lock-in?

The SDK has always been relatively closed even before the Facebook acquisition. They've always touted it as being important for guaranteeing the quality of an experience which I don't necessarily disagree with but its also important for their goal of becoming the biggest VR software platform.

Tmmrn 11y ago
Before the facebook acquisition you could download the source code for the SDK and it had cross platform support. After Facebook: Closed Source, Windows-only.
- coldpie 11y ago
  No, the Oculus server process that does the actual webcam analysis and communication with the HMD and graphics hardware has always been closed.
  - Tmmrn 11y ago
    Yes, but this server application was only introduced with the DK2 and the 0.4.x SDK which was delivered after the facebook acquisition. Whether they would have hold back the source code without facebook - who the hell knows?
    - coldpie 11y ago
      Oh, I didn't know that. I thought the server had been around since the beginning.
    - kirrent 11y ago
      Huh, I didn't know that. I never really had a look at any SDK earlier than that. I just had a false memory that the DK2 came out before the fb acquisition. I do remember Oculus intimating that they couldn't open up the tracking code because it was some proprietary stuff they'd bought but that's almost certainly not the case now.

forrestthewoods 11y ago

If it was projects they owned and paid for? Probably.

drzaiusapelord 11y ago

Oculus from the beginning was fairly big into locking down its ecosystem. I think its clear that it wants an Apple-like level of control where PC gaming turns into a console-like experience. This lock-in benefits them as their store would become the premier outlet for VR sales and Oculus would receive a juicy cut of every VR game sold. Also this would connect to Facebook's social VR ideals of a VR social network and all the privacy issues that come with that. I completely disagree with this philosophy and don't think a simple peripheral should be a wedge into further lock-in in the PC gaming world. I just want to play games, not be a part of some weird Facebook 'trying to stay relevant' agenda or an Oculus 'trying to lock down VR' agenda. Thankfully Valve has spoiled their plans by making a better VR system and an open-ish ecosystem. Valve doesn't pay for exclusives either.