23 ms·

I should rephrase that sentence. Agreed the Quest 2 is a great device for its price. What I mean to say is that the Quest 2 isn't pushing the current limits fo

I should rephrase that sentence. Agreed the Quest 2 is a great device for its price. What I mean to say is that the Quest 2 isn't pushing the current limits for VR pixel density (by having a high Pixels-Per-Degree aka PPD). High PPD is important for gaming but extremely important for VR computing/office, since it heavily impacts how high quality text and other fine details (icons, etc) show up for you. This is one of the main drivers of our high price. Since we're trying to get people to work in a VR headset for 8+ hours in a day (replacing their PCs/laptops as their primary computing device), we needed to offer as high a PPD as we possibly can. This requires state of the art displays and a compute unit powerful enough to power the rendering. We also have a special text filter in Simula which is optimized specifically for text rendering. There are other problems with the Quest 2 as well, but low PPD is the most important one. Price is definitely not one of its problems (though its low price is being subsidized by its bringing people into the Facebook ecosystem, etc). The Quest 2 is primarily a gaming/entertainment device, and it does a pretty good job at that. The Simula One is primarily a VRC (though it can be used for gaming in Tethered mode).

gs17 5y ago
The Quest also isn't pushing the limits for FOV either, compared to my usual headset it feels like goggles. I'm impressed if the Simula really beats it on both of these.
- kanetw 5y ago
  We put in a lot of effort into the optics and we use variable magnification tech to get the most out of our displays (i.e. there's more pixels per degree in the foveal region, and less in the periphery where you can't see them anyways). The drawback is that the optical train is long and there's 3 complex lenses as opposed to 1 glued assembly (not sure if it's 1 or 2 lenses). Adds per-unit cost and assembly labor, and at a $300 ($800 realistically) price point that's a lot.

gs17 5y ago

The Quest also isn't pushing the limits for FOV either, compared to my usual headset it feels like goggles. I'm impressed if the Simula really beats it on both of these.

kanetw 5y ago
We put in a lot of effort into the optics and we use variable magnification tech to get the most out of our displays (i.e. there's more pixels per degree in the foveal region, and less in the periphery where you can't see them anyways). The drawback is that the optical train is long and there's 3 complex lenses as opposed to 1 glued assembly (not sure if it's 1 or 2 lenses). Adds per-unit cost and assembly labor, and at a $300 ($800 realistically) price point that's a lot.