4 ms·
Sure, it'd be called something different and would be made by someone else. It's not like FB started Oculus from scratch. Worst case it would've just taken a li
by geoelectric 6y ago
Sure, it'd be called something different and would be made by someone else. It's not like FB started Oculus from scratch. Worst case it would've just taken a little longer while some other player with the capital got around to being interested.
The use case drove the tech, not the company, and so far the tech is being used for exactly what it was used for before FB bought it (just better as computers, motion sensors, and cameras got better). There was nothing transformative there.
I don't think FB deserves any credit other than being in the right place at the right time. Now they're in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Props for wireless 6DOF before anyone else, and I love my Quest, but now that the trail is blazed and they aren't being maintaining their (yes, their--Palmer worked for them too) promises to the community, they can sit down.
- madeofpalk 6y ago> The use case drove the tech Eh. The money drove the tech - Facebook can afford to dump money into Oculus despite there being very little use cases or consumer appetite for it.
- ccktlmazeltov 6y ago> Sure, it'd be called something different and would be made by someone else interestingly you can say that about pretty much anything, but at some point someone need to work on it for "it" to happen.