4 ms·

I found the detailed comparisons interesting and also came away worried for Simula. The Quest Pro is available this week, has pancake lenses, better GPU, is a

I found the detailed comparisons interesting and also came away worried for Simula. The Quest Pro is available this week, has pancake lenses, better GPU, is a third to half the cost and has bet on Arm which is on its way to eat productivity PCs. Simula doesn’t even run Windows, which would be a nice consolation for being stuck on x86. Quest’s integrated business partnerships are rudimentary but are going to be adopted much faster than Simula users can figure out and share their custom workflows. Quest Pro 2 is probably going to come out before Simula finishes shipping its initial orders next year. We need a Simula to exist, but I don’t think they are going to be able to iterate nearly fast enough to provide to this market. I hope I’m wrong, because it’s a really cool project and completely above board in respect to future ad revenue and metaverse ambitions.

RistrettoMike 4y ago
I came away feeling similarly. Their dedication to developing a true VR computer and focusing on specs that really matter for that (PPD and raw processing grunt) are commendable, but seeing them champion the idea of strapping an X86 computer to your face in what is an increasingly arm-powered world is... concerning. "But it can run real Adobe Acrobat through WINE" is not something that gets me excited about a VR platform, but I'm likely not the target audience either. That being said, having tried out some remote-desktop apps on a Quest 2 earlier this year, the screens are absolutely not acceptable for that purpose in terms of viewable resolution -- so if the Quest Pro really is only slightly better in that regard, I think it'll soil the experience. If Simula can manage to tune their x86 specs to run well enough under power-limited circumstances, have at least comparable poor battery life to other VR headsets, develop a VR computing environment with usage paradigms that make sense, and do it in a headset that's somehow still comfortable to wear for extended sessions, then they may truly be ahead of the curve in a way that matters. That seems like a big ask for such a small company's first outing, but they also seem the most passionate about this category of use-case despite their scale. I wish them the best. VR computers like the one they're working on would be a lot cooler than Meta's vision for the category.
- kanetw 4y ago
  I'm not fundamentally against ARM. But ARM in the VR world is Qualcomm, and they both didn't want to deal with us + their support for regular old Linux is (AFAIK) nonexistent. Apart from that, x86 is IMO just easier to adopt. I wouldn't buy an ARM laptop right now (except for possibly a Macbook). In a different tangent, I think the only way to get good ARM performance in a mobile format is to have custom-tailored silicon, like the Apple chips. Commercially available chips just don't compete with a i7-1265U or the Raptor Lake equiv.
  - RistrettoMike 4y ago
    Absolutely! The nascent state of ARM outside of iOS, Android, and now MacOS is definitely a roadblock for bringing it to projects from smaller companies like you folks. In my eyes (uneducated, consumer-level perspective) X86 is a huge question-mark for HMD devices like this, since the heat and power usage are so counter-intuitive for small form factors -- and mitigating those concerns usually actively works against the "higher-performance" nature of the chips. (low-tdp allowances, throttling, etc.) Like I mentioned above, I really do wish y'all the best of luck with it. I just don't envy having to be reliant on an old and power-hungry architecture just because the newer, better architectures don't lend themselves to this sort of project yet. I hope the Simula One sticks the balance!
    - kanetw 4y ago
      I don't have an XR2 devkit so I can only guess, but TDP-wise they seem pretty comparable. Obviously that doesn't include boost power etc and there's stuff integrated into the XR2 that we need to do on an FPGA, but overall I've not felt like a modern x86 processor is overly disadvantaged. I'm sure one could do a more rigorous comparison, but IMO with the recent Intel/AMD chips you get pretty good performance/power.
- GauntletWizard 4y ago
  Yeah. I like the simula one concept and the VR "Desktop Environment" appeals to me, but I would much prefer to decouple the display from the compute, because the hardware is at different levels of maturity and because the heavy bits don't have to sit on your head - You can stick a lot more compute and battery in a backpack form factor, and even with my Vive I ended up strapping the cords to my back for cable management reasons. If I had to buy a backpack laptop from them (And I would kinda love to have a backpack laptop + weird goggles, be kinda like the "Gargoyles" from Snow Crash) to get their display, happy to do so.
vineyardmike 4y ago
I came away feeling similarly for completely different reasons. Obviously Simula wants to sell themselves and downplay meta for sales purposes, but a lot of their arguments in “ Philosophical Differences” section seemed to just miss the mark. Like, I think they have the wrong philosophy. For example, simula critiqued the Quest Pro for relying on good wifi, noting you can’t use it at coffee shops. That’s a bad use case. They released a video of someone using simula at a coffee shop and everyone thought it was a joke. Productivity VR isn’t a laptop, it’s a better external monitor. You don’t take a monitor to a coffee shop (or other similar establishments). Maybe, maybe a plane is a good place. Probably hotel rooms, certainly offices and homes. Offices and homes can/will have good wifi. They also mention window management and the (lack of) it on the Quest. Except no one (outside techies) knows what a windows manager is or has custom workflows. Instead, quest has screen management so you can have a virtual screen, and manager your own windows. I’m no Nostradamus but I doubt the future of technology rests in heavily customized window managers. Simula also has a few points that are just wrong about the quest, such as the need for a laptop. A laptop helps, but it does have a native browser and Bluetooth keyboard support so you can totally spend your day in Gmail and Google docs and all that browser jazz without a second computer. I do think an “untethered” future for VR is real though, like simula thinks. Quest is just also positioned to handle it through the real future apps platform (browsers) not a techie dream (Linux desktop). For what it’s worth I think the real winner of VR productivity in the short term will end up looking a lot closer to NReal instead of either of these two. It’s cheap and comfortable, so it’s a lot easier to start using. It also entirely relies on your host computer so no one has to set up a new computer, IT doesn’t have to extend support of systems (ActiveDirectory etc) to new platforms, etc.
- treis 4y ago
  >I do think an “untethered” future for VR is real though, like simula thinks I think we're at least a decade or two of battery, processor, and screen development away from making that happen though. IMHO, I'd much rather have a lighter and better headset with a cord than what these two are like.
  - vineyardmike 4y ago
jolmg 4y ago
> Simula doesn’t even run Windows, which would be a nice consolation for being stuck on x86. I think the only issue with getting it to run Windows would be Windows lack of support for stereoscopic displays (for its OS GUI). If someone in the community really wants it and can figure that out, maybe Windows can still run in the unit. This is assuming that there's support for installing whatever Linux distro one wants. If that's true, installing Windows should also be doable, I would think.
- kanetw 4y ago
  You can install any distro. Windows is doable in theory, we just don't focus on it.

RistrettoMike 4y ago

I came away feeling similarly. Their dedication to developing a true VR computer and focusing on specs that really matter for that (PPD and raw processing grunt) are commendable, but seeing them champion the idea of strapping an X86 computer to your face in what is an increasingly arm-powered world is... concerning. "But it can run real Adobe Acrobat through WINE" is not something that gets me excited about a VR platform, but I'm likely not the target audience either. That being said, having tried out some remote-desktop apps on a Quest 2 earlier this year, the screens are absolutely not acceptable for that purpose in terms of viewable resolution -- so if the Quest Pro really is only slightly better in that regard, I think it'll soil the experience. If Simula can manage to tune their x86 specs to run well enough under power-limited circumstances, have at least comparable poor battery life to other VR headsets, develop a VR computing environment with usage paradigms that make sense, and do it in a headset that's somehow still comfortable to wear for extended sessions, then they may truly be ahead of the curve in a way that matters. That seems like a big ask for such a small company's first outing, but they also seem the most passionate about this category of use-case despite their scale. I wish them the best. VR computers like the one they're working on would be a lot cooler than Meta's vision for the category.

kanetw 4y ago
I'm not fundamentally against ARM. But ARM in the VR world is Qualcomm, and they both didn't want to deal with us + their support for regular old Linux is (AFAIK) nonexistent. Apart from that, x86 is IMO just easier to adopt. I wouldn't buy an ARM laptop right now (except for possibly a Macbook). In a different tangent, I think the only way to get good ARM performance in a mobile format is to have custom-tailored silicon, like the Apple chips. Commercially available chips just don't compete with a i7-1265U or the Raptor Lake equiv.
- RistrettoMike 4y ago
  Absolutely! The nascent state of ARM outside of iOS, Android, and now MacOS is definitely a roadblock for bringing it to projects from smaller companies like you folks. In my eyes (uneducated, consumer-level perspective) X86 is a huge question-mark for HMD devices like this, since the heat and power usage are so counter-intuitive for small form factors -- and mitigating those concerns usually actively works against the "higher-performance" nature of the chips. (low-tdp allowances, throttling, etc.) Like I mentioned above, I really do wish y'all the best of luck with it. I just don't envy having to be reliant on an old and power-hungry architecture just because the newer, better architectures don't lend themselves to this sort of project yet. I hope the Simula One sticks the balance!
  - kanetw 4y ago
    I don't have an XR2 devkit so I can only guess, but TDP-wise they seem pretty comparable. Obviously that doesn't include boost power etc and there's stuff integrated into the XR2 that we need to do on an FPGA, but overall I've not felt like a modern x86 processor is overly disadvantaged. I'm sure one could do a more rigorous comparison, but IMO with the recent Intel/AMD chips you get pretty good performance/power.
GauntletWizard 4y ago
Yeah. I like the simula one concept and the VR "Desktop Environment" appeals to me, but I would much prefer to decouple the display from the compute, because the hardware is at different levels of maturity and because the heavy bits don't have to sit on your head - You can stick a lot more compute and battery in a backpack form factor, and even with my Vive I ended up strapping the cords to my back for cable management reasons. If I had to buy a backpack laptop from them (And I would kinda love to have a backpack laptop + weird goggles, be kinda like the "Gargoyles" from Snow Crash) to get their display, happy to do so.

vineyardmike 4y ago

I came away feeling similarly for completely different reasons. Obviously Simula wants to sell themselves and downplay meta for sales purposes, but a lot of their arguments in “ Philosophical Differences” section seemed to just miss the mark. Like, I think they have the wrong philosophy. For example, simula critiqued the Quest Pro for relying on good wifi, noting you can’t use it at coffee shops. That’s a bad use case. They released a video of someone using simula at a coffee shop and everyone thought it was a joke. Productivity VR isn’t a laptop, it’s a better external monitor. You don’t take a monitor to a coffee shop (or other similar establishments). Maybe, maybe a plane is a good place. Probably hotel rooms, certainly offices and homes. Offices and homes can/will have good wifi. They also mention window management and the (lack of) it on the Quest. Except no one (outside techies) knows what a windows manager is or has custom workflows. Instead, quest has screen management so you can have a virtual screen, and manager your own windows. I’m no Nostradamus but I doubt the future of technology rests in heavily customized window managers. Simula also has a few points that are just wrong about the quest, such as the need for a laptop. A laptop helps, but it does have a native browser and Bluetooth keyboard support so you can totally spend your day in Gmail and Google docs and all that browser jazz without a second computer. I do think an “untethered” future for VR is real though, like simula thinks. Quest is just also positioned to handle it through the real future apps platform (browsers) not a techie dream (Linux desktop). For what it’s worth I think the real winner of VR productivity in the short term will end up looking a lot closer to NReal instead of either of these two. It’s cheap and comfortable, so it’s a lot easier to start using. It also entirely relies on your host computer so no one has to set up a new computer, IT doesn’t have to extend support of systems (ActiveDirectory etc) to new platforms, etc.

treis 4y ago
>I do think an “untethered” future for VR is real though, like simula thinks I think we're at least a decade or two of battery, processor, and screen development away from making that happen though. IMHO, I'd much rather have a lighter and better headset with a cord than what these two are like.
- vineyardmike 4y ago

jolmg 4y ago

> Simula doesn’t even run Windows, which would be a nice consolation for being stuck on x86. I think the only issue with getting it to run Windows would be Windows lack of support for stereoscopic displays (for its OS GUI). If someone in the community really wants it and can figure that out, maybe Windows can still run in the unit. This is assuming that there's support for installing whatever Linux distro one wants. If that's true, installing Windows should also be doable, I would think.

kanetw 4y ago
You can install any distro. Windows is doable in theory, we just don't focus on it.