13 ms·

Meta Quest Pro – Bad AR Passthrough

283 points by dagmx 4y ago

2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
The passthrough isn't supposed to be able to read an eye chart. The actual displayed screens look very good though.
- batch12 4y ago
  You're not supposed to be able to see well through the device?
  - jayd16 4y ago
    It's not promising to be able to drive with it. You can have the device on and see other people and the space around you while still interacting with virtual objects. You can safely operate the device in a cluttered space without clearing a 3x3 meter space.
  - vineyardmike 4y ago
    It’s meant to be good enough to see someone walk up to you or not hit something like a dog underfoot. Maybe find a keyboard key instead of only touch type. It’s not meant to be as clear as your glasses so you can drive or take a vision test.
  - gkoberger 4y ago
    Well, I'm sure in future versions it will be a lot better. But my experience with my Meta Quest Pro is that it's more for getting a vague idea of your surroundings than just interacting with them. For me, the only time I've seen it pop up is when I step out of my "zone". Rather than just flashing red, I get a vague understanding of where I'm standing and who's nearby. I've never had a problem with it at all, even though I acknowledge the picture isn't particularly great.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - Shank 4y ago
      > But my experience with my Meta Quest Pro is that it's more for getting a vague idea of your surroundings than just interacting with them. The point of the article is that this experience, while good, is juxtaposed with Meta's marketing claim that it's a mixed reality device. You're saying the device is good at the thing the author says it was probably built for. Mixed reality implies that you're seamlessly switching between environments, as if there wasn't a distinction.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
    I thought the purpose was to maintain awareness of surroundings while using the headset which it accomplishes. Not pass an eye test. It's bad at doing a thing that's window dressing.
- MBCook 4y ago
  Do you have a citation for Meta saying something like that? The article implies they’ve been hyping up AR (which matches my tiny knowledge of the product) and that seems useless if the Reality part of AR is blurry.
  - zmmmmm 4y ago
    > The article implies they’ve been hyping up AR The article is effectively lying. Try searching their page [0] for augmented reality. It's not there. They refer to "mixed reality" specifically because that is actually different to AR, specifically in the sense that "reality" is not the primary focus of the experience. [0] https://www.meta.com/au/quest/quest-pro/ https://www.meta.com/au/quest/quest-pro/
- judge2020 4y ago
  Right under the price on this page https://www.meta.com/quest/quest-pro/ https://www.meta.com/quest/quest-pro/ the first feature is AR / passthrough. In fact, most of the page is dedicated to things other than gaming. > With breakthrough high resolution mixed reality you can engage effortlessly with the virtual world while maintaining presence in your physical space in hi-def color.
  - sroussey 4y ago
    Hi-def when compared to their previous product only.
  - zmmmmm 4y ago
    It literally never says AR. It says "mixed reality". In mixed reality, the pass through (real world) quality is secondary to the virtual objects that are rendered within it. These virtual are rendered at high resolution, hence we have "high resolution" mixed reality. People seem to just not understand that mixed reality is different to augmented reality?
    - randallsquared 4y ago
      I promise you that "Well, technically..." is a losing marketing proposition. MR just comes off as "AR, but not very good at it".
    - kibwen 4y ago
      > People seem to just not understand that mixed reality is different to augmented reality? I can't help but feel that this is a distinction without merit. It appears to be jargon designed to muddy the waters and deflect criticism.
fomine3 4y ago
Great review. It should have a normal camera, as a $1500 device with same SoC.
JEDI-HACKER 4y ago
[flagged]
RistrettoMike 4y ago
On mobile, so I can’t properly view/appreciate the detail-shots, but this is exactly the kind of post I’ve been waiting to see written covering the Quest Pro. I tried the Quest 2 last year mostly out of curiosity for the use cases that Meta themselves would go on to push as the primary focuses of the Quest Pro; VR productivity and virtual monitors. I was left drastically underwhelmed at the time with the resolution and viewing experience from the Quest 2 (among other things), and after hearing that the Pro wouldn’t have much of an upgrade in that department I was really curious what actual productivity focused power users would think of it. This blog/series of posts looks to be just that, and I’ve added it to my feed reader for the rest of the series!
- vineyardmike 4y ago
  If you’re interested in virtual monitors, and willing to be a bit ahem bleeding edge, try the NReal Air. They’re no replacement for a high quality 34” curved monitor but come kinda close to a nice 25” 1080p monitor IME. They suffer the same issues as other VR solutions (focusing on fine text can be hard, it shakes on your head, etc). But unlike the Quest, you can set it to “Aircast” mode which basically replaces an VR/AR experience and turns the headset into a true “head mounted monitor” - which is different than their special software. I tried it with their virtual monitor software, and it’s unusable. If you move your head, it refreshes the monitor you’re viewing at like 2fps so it’s super jerky and not smooth. It’s not good enough to replace a real stationary monitor for me yet, but it’s probably good enough for someone constantly on the go, or for airplane usage (extra privacy). They’re also far more comfortable than a Quest since they don’t have batteries or a processor built in. I want to add that I think they shake more than the quest because you can’t strap it in tightly like you can with a quest and a hard strap
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - atonalfreerider 4y ago
    Self promote: https://primitive.io https://primitive.io is a VR enabled collaborative immersive development environment where we have optimized code readability in every respect
genghisjahn 4y ago
My Quest 2 is 99% used to play 5 on 5 Onward VR. To all you Onward PC users, my apologies. I thought I was done with video games but it's fantastic. The experience reminds of showing up to public basketball courts during the summer. You get on a team with some random people. Sometimes you're the best on the court, sometimes you're the worst. By I love the Quest 2 and would replace it if my got broken simply to keep playing Onward.
- germinalphrase 4y ago
  How accommodating is the community to new players? Seems like the type of game that would attract a…serious player base.
  - genghisjahn 4y ago
    There is a learning curve. If you jump straight into the 5 on 5 matches without some basics down it’s not much fun. Do some single player against bots. Then play coop against bots. Then do multiplayer gun game. Once you can win a round of gun game, IMO, you are ready for assault, uplink and escort. The main thing is knowing maps and the radio. A team that uses the radio well and can call out locations will destroy a team of sharp shooting lone wolfs. There are people who take it serious and those that are trying to figure things out. It’s all good. People will teach you things. Also the competitive lobbies are marked as such, so just avoid those.
    - germinalphrase 4y ago
      I tried playing today and the motion sickness hit me hard. Haven’t had much of a problem with it previously.
kart23 4y ago
I don’t think people fully grasp how much power and compute it takes to record and process video (me included). let me know how long that canon r5 can record for continuously, and how many batteries it’ll go through for that recording time. It wasn’t that long ago that it was taxing for desktop computers to play a 4k video file.
- madeofpalk 4y ago
  Still doesn't make it good.
- threeseed 4y ago
  With cameras the problem isn't the power or compute. It's the heat dissipation. Cameras like the Sigma FP are built around the heat sink and have vents all around to dissipate the heat during long recording sessions. Most typical DSLRs simply have recording limits e.g. Canon R6 = 30 mins. Pretty big issue for a device they are aiming to be around your head for hours at a time.
  - yafbum 4y ago
    In addition to the recording limits on a DSLR, you might need to rest it for a good while if you're filming for a long time with too much light on a hot day. It shuts off when the sensor's too hot.
  - into_infinity 4y ago
    The 30 minute limit had little to do with heat: https://www.fujirumors.com/yes-eu-import-duty-reason-fujifilm-x-h1-limited-30-minutes-will-change-2018-2019/ https://www.fujirumors.com/yes-eu-import-duty-reason-fujifil...
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - daniel_reetz 4y ago
    Well, that's not exactly right -they're two sides of a coin. twice the pixels equals twice the power at almost every level. The pixel level, the image signal processor level, the processor, and storage.
sdrinf 4y ago
The primary use case for passthrough is not AR, it was not intended to be projecting stuff over room interior, and as such, it's crap at a thing that it is explicitely not optimized for. The primary use case for passthrough is bringing stuff into VR, specifically your hands (when used in hand tracking mode), and your keyboard. Your monitor is projected into VR by being hooked to your headset. Any other function's utility has been traded off for these purposes.
- SheinhardtWigCo 4y ago
  The author's point is that it's crap at a thing it's explicitly marketed as being good at.
  - theptip 4y ago
    It's a weird point to spend so much ink on though. The author explicitly raises the possiblity that the marketing fluff could just be marketing fluff, but then seem to go on as if this can't be the explanation. Seems obvious to me that the "Mixed reality" stuff is just marketing fluff, if you pay any attention to the technical evolution of this product line when interpreting these complaints.
- adastra22 4y ago
  Source? Other “Pro” models like HoloLens are explicitly AR-only. What Pro use cases are there for VR?
  - leoqa 4y ago
    I’m interested in it for a hybrid VR-AR for flight sim cockpits. The Varjo Aero is used for this, allowing you to build a cockpit replica and interact with it via pass thru but still using VR for outside the cockpit.
  - RandallBrown 4y ago
    I figured the "Pro" in Meta Quest just means it's more powerful than the quest 2...
makeitdouble 4y ago
As a Quest2 user the passthrough view is only usable to find back the controllers and clear my surroundings, so I genuinely wondered how much better it got on the Pro with all the “project a secondary display” push. From these results, it looks like you’ll still be SOL if you forgot which key on your keyboard has the backtick, or try to quickly glance at your phone, or check your room’s air quality or temperature to adjust as needed. From the pictures it still looks twice nicer than the Quest2, but we’re so far away from something actually workable.
- jayd16 4y ago
  It's good enough to hunt and peck a keyboard but a phone screen is usually too blown out. The Pro sits off from your face more so you'd just see a phone or a keyboard through the gap anyhow.
edgefield 4y ago
A new VR arcade opened up in my area and I visited with my son. They were using HTC Vive headsets, which retail for $1,000+. It’s the first time I really used VR, especially in a couch coop mode setup. The following struck me: (1) There is no killer, must have game for VR. Beat Saber seems to be the most popular and mainstream game but not nearly engaging enough to convince the mass market to buy one or more VR headsets. Related, we cycled through about 5 games and none of graphics were particular realistic or immersive. I didn’t walk a way from the experience thinking wow! And note I’ve had this “wow” experience playing PS4 games on a higher end TV that supports HDR. (2) We had a 1 hour session with the goggles and I felt quite sea sick during and after gameplay. The headset was also uncomfortable after 30 minutes or so. Playing games while sea sick is about as much fun as it sounds. It’s pretty awful. (3) The arcade was expensive. I paid nearly $100 for 1 hour for 2 people in a MCOL area. One of the reasons for the high cost is the arcade required an employee to help us cycle through games and explain gameplay and controls. It dawned on me after the experience that my son and I would have to buy two headsets, not just one, for any couch coop play. Maybe we’d have to buy two copies of games as well? Gaming is really becoming a social experience, which is why Fortnight is such a big hit because it’s essentially free and cross platform. VR is dead in the water unless they bring to market must-have games (or other apps and Beat Saber is nowhere close to this), solve the sea sickness problem, and somehow bring down the cost so two headsets cost about as much as a current generation console. I think it’s also very premature for Meta to go after the business market. It first needs to convince geeks like me to buy and evangelize about VR. If anything, my experience at the VR arcade convinced me NOT to buy VR goggles. Good luck building out a new market if this is a typical reaction to the state of VR today.
- threeseed 4y ago
  a) 10 million Quest 2 devices have been sold. There is already a market. b) Business market is already a large adopter of VR devices e.g. for training, warehouses, architecture/car etc demos etc. Meta is big enough to tackle both markets at once. And Quest Pro helps to validate newer technologies that will trickle down into their cheaper models. c) Motion sickness is better on newer devices and from research videos Meta already understands what are the causes of it. It's now largely an engineering question of how to get solutions translated into shipping products.
Mizza 4y ago
I've heard that some of the AR stuff got nerfed because of the ability of IR cameras to see through some fabrics and Facebook not wanting to have those headlines in the newspapers. I just heard it as a rumour though, perhaps an insider with a throwaway account can "shed some light".
- pia32 4y ago
  While I don't have insider info, I highly doubt this. The Quest 2 (which I own) uses monochrome cameras without IR cut filters, and they do passthrough with those. So any problems with privacy would have been found already with the current device.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- LordDragonfang 4y ago
  That was the projected-IR depth sensors that got removed. It's unclear how those would affect the image quality here.
amelius 4y ago
How good is the resolution? Can you already use the device as a monitor-replacement? (I.e., coding behind a virtual monitor on an exotic location, while you're just at home behind the desk)
- modeless 4y ago
  The angular resolution is much worse than typical monitors, and the comfort is not really there. You'll want to wait a couple more generations.
- vineyardmike 4y ago
  It is good enough that you can imagine the possibility of using it. Not good enough to actually use it like this (IMO/IME- There’s stories here of people doing this). A few generations and it’ll be doable.
- zmmmmm 4y ago
  It's just usable as a monitor replacement, but it would be a big stretch to say it's "better". If you have even a cheap a monitor available you'd nearly always be better off actually using it. The scenario where it's better are going to be specific use cases like: - it's helpful to have it be gigantic - bigger than a real monitor could ever be - you have a real need for more monitors than would be practical to buy or position in your work environment - you will be highly mobile and moving around so much that it's going to be better to take a headset with you than try to get monitors everwhere - you really would like to collaborate with someone else who also has a Quest Pro, in which case you can work together without being physically together - you highly benefit from / enjoy working in alternative environments (eg: being highly focused, free of distractions, relaxed, surrounded by beatiful scenery etc) I actually find the latter point is the biggest reason I do it. Even when I'm surrounded by distractions I can go into a completely calm virtual environment and get a crap load of work done.
  - joewhatkins 4y ago
    Just adding my two cents here - I bought a quest pro hoping to use it as a monitor replacement while traveling for a couple of months. I found it pretty much unworkable after trying to make it work across multiple different virtual desktop apps. You can get something up and running - but it feels akin to staring at a 1080p screen with a weird delay. I felt way more productive just looking at my tiny laptop screen. Your mileage may vary, obviously. I really liked the idea of working in a distraction free virtual environment, but I feel like the tech isn’t there yet unless you’re an enthusiast whose willing to put up with all of the strangeness.
brasic 4y ago
(Edit: the tearing is not visible through the device, so quite a bit less damning than I thought.) The tear and color lag on this picture of a moving chart is damning: https://i0.wp.com/kguttag.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/MQP-frame-roll.jpg https://i0.wp.com/kguttag.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/MQP... As is this quote: > I also ran a small experiment where I sent a camera flash off in a dimly lit room and measured the delay with light sensors using one sensor to trigger an oscilloscope’s capture and the second light sensor to capture the display response. It typically took a little over four 90Hz frame times (~40 to 50ms) for the flash to show up on the image.
- charcircuit 4y ago
  The tear is an artifact with how the screen capture works. The tear is not actually sent to the display. People who capture Quest footage using scrcpy are well aware of this downside compared to using the built in recording feature which doesn't have the same tearing issue.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - brasic 4y ago
    Thanks, I missed that. Posted an edit at the top of my comment.
zmmmmm 4y ago
The author persistently conflates AR and MR throughout the posting, evaluating the Quest Pro as an AR device but the concluding at the end it's a terrible "MR" device because it failed at their AR tests. It seems to suggest they really think these terms are synonymous but they aren't. While AR aims to enable display and interaction with the real world but with augmentations, MR aims to bring virtual objects into the real world and allow you to interact with those. You really don't need such a high fidelity view of the real world to do that. The virtual objects are rendered with very high fidelity. I am fairly confused by the low res cameras used in the QPro. I have to assume Meta were just heavily constrained by the need for them to do double duty as tracking cameras and pass through cameras, so higher quality cameras just weren't available. But why only a single color pass through camera? This really doesn't make much sense other than if you allow that the processor on the Quest Pro is so limited that even if it had both feeds it probably couldn't process them. I think it's actually great news that there is so much optimization left to do. Seems like they should be able to improve it a lot over time, and in the meantime it's pretty adequate to enable exploration of some unique experiences. edit: VR => MR
- charcircuit 4y ago
  This blog post is written by Karl Guttag who is someone who is interested in AR, but not very interested in VR. The reason he is coming at it from an AR angle is that is what kind of device he is looking for. If you look at the rest of his blog you can see many articles related to AR.
  - kakali 4y ago
    That’s fine, but it’s okay to call out the author’s bias. They contributed wonderful tests of the limitations of the headset. But the headset is only a failure for the authors use case. (AR)
    - charcircuit 4y ago
      I agree. If you know the author the bias is clear, but it's okay to point it out for people who are not familiar with him.
sheerun 4y ago
Can confirm, I've returned mine
- jejeyyy77 4y ago
  I love mine!
localhost 4y ago
I did some calculations this morning after reading The Information's (paywalled, sorry) article [1] on the Apple VR device which has 4K per eye resolution. My 27" 4K monitor sits about 28 inches away from my eyes on my desk. This translates into about 46 degree field of view, or about 83 pixels per degree. I can't see pixels at that distance. If we take 60 pixels per degree as the Apple "Retina" standard, and if we assume that the field of view of the Apple VR device is ideal (120 degrees), then we would need a horizontal resolution of ~7k to match my setup at the "Retina" standard. If you compromise a bit on FOV, you can squeeze it down to 6k, which is within the reach of "today's" current display technology [2]. The Apple VR device is rumored to be powered by some custom silicon with foveated rendering optimizations (render only what you are looking at with the highest resolution) and is maxing out an M2 class GPU with unknown # of GPU cores on the device per The Information article. A doubling of GPU performance may get us to the 6K display per eye, optimistically the v2 of the Apple VR device? [1] https://www.theinformation.com/articles/inside-the-tech-powering-apples-envelope-pushing-risky-mixed-reality-headset https://www.theinformation.com/articles/inside-the-tech-powe... [2] https://www.roadtovr.com/pimax-reality-12k-qled-announcement-release-date-price-specs/ https://www.roadtovr.com/pimax-reality-12k-qled-announcement...
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
jupp0r 4y ago
In spite of all the negativity, I'm super excited about the future of AR. - being able to see in extremely wide spectrum bands compared to human eyesight - being able to see in higher dynamic ranges than the human eye - being able to magnify little details and thus see with a higher spatial resolution than the human eye - all of this while enhancing your field of view with lots of other interesting information
- wahnfrieden 4y ago
  aren't these all reliant on scientific breakthroughs? they're scifi features that we're unsure we'll achieve. promising direction to pursue though edit: minus IR/thermal
  - LordDragonfang 4y ago
    All of these are possible, individually, with current technology (e.g. "being able to see in extremely wide spectrum bands compared to human eyesight" means IR/nightvision cameras), but it's currently cost-prohibitive to combine them all into one device
    - jupp0r 4y ago
      A lot of camera technology that was cost prohibitive a few years ago is now in every smartphone. Remember 4k video cameras costing >$100k?
      - LordDragonfang 4y ago
        ...That's exactly GP's point, yes.
  - NavinF 4y ago
    You've never used a thermal camera?
- vineyardmike 4y ago
  None of these seem like things any company is actually working on…? Or at least no rumor has ever mentioned. (Yes thermal cameras exist, but not really as an AR overlay)
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
semireg 4y ago
I’m not a AR/VR bull but I think Apple’s position is extremely underestimated. It’s almost like every Apple product has been developed and refined for the future AR/VR moment. Custom silicon. Fast camera HDR. LiDAR. People/scene/room/boundary detection. AirPod Max fit and finish. Spatial audio. 50 other things… All in the service of AR/VR.
- Bilal_io 4y ago
  I personally think Apple is very capable. The issue is they'll build a good enough VR then put it within their walled garden.
  - kibwen 4y ago
    Having used Apple software, I'm honestly not convinced of Apple's ability to deliver anything half as sophisticated as VR.
    - vineyardmike 4y ago
      Having used some of apples existing AR stuff… I would believe they can ship their existing AR stuff and figure out how to make 2 screens that are nearly identical display the data.
- acer589 4y ago
  Yeah, when I look at the processing stuff they're doing on passthrough on AirPods, they are 100% much deeper on AR than most people think.
- likeabbas 4y ago
  Dedicated Neural Processors on iPhones. Constant focus on improving battery life with awesome performance. Wearables that work best when using the iPhone as the main hub. Apple is absolutely gearing up to dominate AR by having a sleek set of glasses that use your iPhone for the graphics rendering. And they'll succeed.
  - 4y ago
cycomanic 4y ago
As a side note, has anyone seen a test/review of the simula one (https://simulavr.com/ https://simulavr.com/)? I think they actually have the correct ideas about making a business/developer headset and I'm seriously considering pre-ordering (but have had quite bad experiences with pre-ordering in the past, so have been holding off for now).
- georgewsinger 4y ago
  Though we finished our first Simula One "Review Unit" back in September (this being a stripped down prototype which demonstrates display, optics, and main board functionality), we haven't released a prototype to testers yet due to it being too unpolished. You can see some videos of it in action however here[1]. Here are some things on the horizon for us to finish before we release test units to YouTubers: - Add an IPD adjustment mechanism[2]. Currently, our prototype's IPD is locked in place until we add this functionality, which makes it really poor for testing since there's lots of variation in IPD. - Incorporate our front-facing cameras for our AR Mode. On this front, we recently shipped our Camera Boards to PCB fab[3]. Note that our cameras support 2448x2048 per eye resolution, and are placed more directly over the eyes than the Quest Pro (avoiding the issues discussed in the parent post). For a fuller comparison against the Quest Pro see[4]. - Replace our FPGA eval board with our own custom FPGA. (Just started on this; will likely discuss it during our next blog update). - Integrate our detachable compute pack to the back of the headset (right now our compute pack is just dangling). So all in all, while much of the core functionality is there, our headset is still too unpolished to send to YouTubers. Also: I understand your skepticism RE preordering. We try to keep a consistent stream of blog updates to at least let people know what's going on engineering wise. [1] https://simulavr.com/blog/first-glimpse-of-review-units/ https://simulavr.com/blog/first-glimpse-of-review-units/ [2] https://simulavr.com/blog/simula-one-auto-ipd-adjustment/ https://simulavr.com/blog/simula-one-auto-ipd-adjustment/ [3] https://simulavr.com/blog/camera-boards-submitted/ https://simulavr.com/blog/camera-boards-submitted/ [4] https://simulavr.com/blog/simula-one-vs-quest-pro/ https://simulavr.com/blog/simula-one-vs-quest-pro/
  - cycomanic 4y ago
    Thanks for the reply and detailed info. I possibly have a job change lined up, will have a serious look again if that goes through.
nl 4y ago
I've been a complete cynic of VR/AR since in started. I just didn't see any point to it ourside games (which don't interest me). But someone in our office had a Quest Pro and I was blown away. It's the first time I've ever felt like I wanted to use or build thing in or for VR, and it was the Mixed Reality mode that make it like that. Unlike this review, I found mixed review very impressive. I suspect it was because I was viewing it primarily as a VR device with just some limited capability for real world interaction as opposed to an AR device. I think when viewed through a VR-first lens it's very impressive. I still don't know what I'd actually want to use it for, but it was the first time I felt like Meta might be actually onto something.
- bni 4y ago
  Games is the point and is all VR is good for for the foreseeable future. The problem is that Meta are not content with that, they want it to be some "social" thing so they can make $$$ instead of just $
choppaface 4y ago
Super compelling screenshots, but isn’t the thesis of “Meta Quest Pro (not?) viable for work” best proven out by somebody actually doing a shiny project using one? And if nobody does then maybe it really is for sure snake oil? For example the the pix comparing the headset to high-end Canon VR180 .. that suggests maybe the viz should just be bigger? Great write-up about the faults, but there’s gotta be a work task that can work? Beyond beat saber?
bostonbot 4y ago
I agree with most of the points here. I think Meta is missing the point with their uncanny valley avatars and focus on business applications. Personal connection like events and fitness training is key. These applications don’t rely on high definition. MR fitness is going to skyrocket this year and next year with color pass through. Checkout Liteboxer and how they are using chroma keyed trainers to make it feel like they are in your home. The quest pro is better balanced and touches your face less too.
yalogin 4y ago
Is it possible they pivoted from a consumer device to a business device mid stream and so did not do justice to the functionality? They probably should have waited to iron out the issues before releasing.
LukeWalsh 4y ago
The product (marketing) decision to focus on AR passthrough does seem really strange. If I was going to use a VR device for work, then, maybe if the resolution was high enough it could be nice to have much more space, but, I'd really only care that I'm not bumping into things. I'm not exactly sure why this AR route is being pushed before it's ready -- living in the world through cameras seems like a much harder problem to be solved after getting the base VR case to work. IMO the more interesting business cases would be around simulated environments even as simple as viewing 360 videos for places where workers would be expected to know what's going on when they enter. Thanks for the detailed analysis!
oogabooga13 4y ago
Having a virtual movie theater has been the killer feature for me. I sit in on my comfy couch and stream movies from my computer into the headset. Awesome. For me it is better than buying a real TV for the purpose of movie watching. Also VR Chat (also an app) has been awesome for connecting and talking with new people. Environments from orbiting high above the earth in space to a rooftop restauraunt in Paris make it fun to spend a few hours with new people. As other have said, inside other VR application there is a lot of "neat" "potential" but hampered execution due to software, hardware, or both. I always tell people we've made some gigantic leaps but we're still in the early stages.
hoseja 4y ago
Why does it seem so hard to put decent cameras into anything that isn't a smartphone? Webcams, this, ...
Nevermark 4y ago
The eye test is hilarious - the true test of AR! But I love my Meta Quest Pro because I love the Oculus 2 for fitness VR and the Pro is incrementally noticeably better And the humble AR is fantastic for minimal interactions like physically orienting or real world communication in a pinch (ironically!) it vaguely resembles being there ... because I am? I have yet to run a Meta social VR or AR app. Too scared I will run into a creepy Zuckertar!!!
esskay 4y ago
I really, really hope that whatever Apple ends up releasing completely wipes the floor with Meta's headsets. They need some real competition to force them to really push the limits. It's going to be interesting to see what happens if the rumors about Apple's being extremely lightweight are true - it wouldn't be surprising if it is given their tiny but efficient SOC design. This is what will kill Meta if they arent careful. They're about to get a competitor who's able to deliver performance levels significantly higher, and at lower power consumption and weight.
- diziet 4y ago
  Not having the battery be on the device but plugged in the phone or on a waist strap, and using more expensive, but smaller pancake vs fresnel lenses can make the effected perceived weight a lot.
  - esskay 4y ago
    From the sounds of it it'll be built in. I'd assume it'll be on the rear though to balance the weight out.
alex_suzuki 4y ago
This read almost like a paid hit against Meta, ordered by a competitor. With just a quick jab at Magic Leap for plausible deniability…
weakfortress 4y ago
[dead]
hardsnow 4y ago
As someone with first-hand experience in implementing pass-through AR, I found the review well-made (e.g., they measured photon-to-photon latency) and extremely interesting. Here's a few observations I made: 1. 30 Hz frame rate and 50ms photon-to-photon latency sound so bad that I'm surprised they launched this at all. I would be very interested in trying this out to see how (un)comfortable the experience is. What I would have expected is pass-through feed rate synchronized to display frame rate (i.e., 90 Hz) and photon-to-photon latency no more than perhaps 2 frames (22ms). At 90 Hz and 11ms you can actually play ping-pong while wearing a pass-through headset. 2. I can relate with the exposure, saturation, and noise issues. The existing well-tuned video ISP pipes aren't suitable for low latency, and building a new one that achieves low latency and gives a good picture in indoor lighting from an essentially smartphone sensor with exposure time < 11ms and doesn't add multi-frame latency is HARD. 3. Above points to one possible explanation for the 30Hz capture; maybe they used a cheap sensor that can't produce usable picture in < 11ms exposure time (in dimly lit indoor environment) and thus had to go with 30Hz capture. Would be interesting to repeat the experiment in well-lit (outdoor) environment to see if the capture pipe kicks into a higher framerate. 4. I wonder if they do any warping to correct for the camera positions and how well that works. For AR-focused headset the ideal pass-through camera positions would approximate eye positions to minimize need for distortion. Even shifting capture positions a few centimeters forward from the eyes (which you'd need to do if you don't replace eyes with cameras or play tricks with optics) creates a subtle but noticeable effect unless corrected.

283 points by dagmx 4y ago

2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago

The passthrough isn't supposed to be able to read an eye chart. The actual displayed screens look very good though.

batch12 4y ago
You're not supposed to be able to see well through the device?
- jayd16 4y ago
  It's not promising to be able to drive with it. You can have the device on and see other people and the space around you while still interacting with virtual objects. You can safely operate the device in a cluttered space without clearing a 3x3 meter space.
- vineyardmike 4y ago
  It’s meant to be good enough to see someone walk up to you or not hit something like a dog underfoot. Maybe find a keyboard key instead of only touch type. It’s not meant to be as clear as your glasses so you can drive or take a vision test.
- gkoberger 4y ago
  Well, I'm sure in future versions it will be a lot better. But my experience with my Meta Quest Pro is that it's more for getting a vague idea of your surroundings than just interacting with them. For me, the only time I've seen it pop up is when I step out of my "zone". Rather than just flashing red, I get a vague understanding of where I'm standing and who's nearby. I've never had a problem with it at all, even though I acknowledge the picture isn't particularly great.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - Shank 4y ago
    > But my experience with my Meta Quest Pro is that it's more for getting a vague idea of your surroundings than just interacting with them. The point of the article is that this experience, while good, is juxtaposed with Meta's marketing claim that it's a mixed reality device. You're saying the device is good at the thing the author says it was probably built for. Mixed reality implies that you're seamlessly switching between environments, as if there wasn't a distinction.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
  I thought the purpose was to maintain awareness of surroundings while using the headset which it accomplishes. Not pass an eye test. It's bad at doing a thing that's window dressing.
MBCook 4y ago
Do you have a citation for Meta saying something like that? The article implies they’ve been hyping up AR (which matches my tiny knowledge of the product) and that seems useless if the Reality part of AR is blurry.
- zmmmmm 4y ago
  > The article implies they’ve been hyping up AR The article is effectively lying. Try searching their page [0] for augmented reality. It's not there. They refer to "mixed reality" specifically because that is actually different to AR, specifically in the sense that "reality" is not the primary focus of the experience. [0] https://www.meta.com/au/quest/quest-pro/ https://www.meta.com/au/quest/quest-pro/
judge2020 4y ago
Right under the price on this page https://www.meta.com/quest/quest-pro/ https://www.meta.com/quest/quest-pro/ the first feature is AR / passthrough. In fact, most of the page is dedicated to things other than gaming. > With breakthrough high resolution mixed reality you can engage effortlessly with the virtual world while maintaining presence in your physical space in hi-def color.
- sroussey 4y ago
  Hi-def when compared to their previous product only.
- zmmmmm 4y ago
  It literally never says AR. It says "mixed reality". In mixed reality, the pass through (real world) quality is secondary to the virtual objects that are rendered within it. These virtual are rendered at high resolution, hence we have "high resolution" mixed reality. People seem to just not understand that mixed reality is different to augmented reality?
  - randallsquared 4y ago
    I promise you that "Well, technically..." is a losing marketing proposition. MR just comes off as "AR, but not very good at it".
  - kibwen 4y ago
    > People seem to just not understand that mixed reality is different to augmented reality? I can't help but feel that this is a distinction without merit. It appears to be jargon designed to muddy the waters and deflect criticism.

fomine3 4y ago

Great review. It should have a normal camera, as a $1500 device with same SoC.

JEDI-HACKER 4y ago

[flagged]

RistrettoMike 4y ago

On mobile, so I can’t properly view/appreciate the detail-shots, but this is exactly the kind of post I’ve been waiting to see written covering the Quest Pro. I tried the Quest 2 last year mostly out of curiosity for the use cases that Meta themselves would go on to push as the primary focuses of the Quest Pro; VR productivity and virtual monitors. I was left drastically underwhelmed at the time with the resolution and viewing experience from the Quest 2 (among other things), and after hearing that the Pro wouldn’t have much of an upgrade in that department I was really curious what actual productivity focused power users would think of it. This blog/series of posts looks to be just that, and I’ve added it to my feed reader for the rest of the series!

vineyardmike 4y ago
If you’re interested in virtual monitors, and willing to be a bit ahem bleeding edge, try the NReal Air. They’re no replacement for a high quality 34” curved monitor but come kinda close to a nice 25” 1080p monitor IME. They suffer the same issues as other VR solutions (focusing on fine text can be hard, it shakes on your head, etc). But unlike the Quest, you can set it to “Aircast” mode which basically replaces an VR/AR experience and turns the headset into a true “head mounted monitor” - which is different than their special software. I tried it with their virtual monitor software, and it’s unusable. If you move your head, it refreshes the monitor you’re viewing at like 2fps so it’s super jerky and not smooth. It’s not good enough to replace a real stationary monitor for me yet, but it’s probably good enough for someone constantly on the go, or for airplane usage (extra privacy). They’re also far more comfortable than a Quest since they don’t have batteries or a processor built in. I want to add that I think they shake more than the quest because you can’t strap it in tightly like you can with a quest and a hard strap
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- atonalfreerider 4y ago
  Self promote: https://primitive.io https://primitive.io is a VR enabled collaborative immersive development environment where we have optimized code readability in every respect

genghisjahn 4y ago

My Quest 2 is 99% used to play 5 on 5 Onward VR. To all you Onward PC users, my apologies. I thought I was done with video games but it's fantastic. The experience reminds of showing up to public basketball courts during the summer. You get on a team with some random people. Sometimes you're the best on the court, sometimes you're the worst. By I love the Quest 2 and would replace it if my got broken simply to keep playing Onward.

germinalphrase 4y ago
How accommodating is the community to new players? Seems like the type of game that would attract a…serious player base.
- genghisjahn 4y ago
  There is a learning curve. If you jump straight into the 5 on 5 matches without some basics down it’s not much fun. Do some single player against bots. Then play coop against bots. Then do multiplayer gun game. Once you can win a round of gun game, IMO, you are ready for assault, uplink and escort. The main thing is knowing maps and the radio. A team that uses the radio well and can call out locations will destroy a team of sharp shooting lone wolfs. There are people who take it serious and those that are trying to figure things out. It’s all good. People will teach you things. Also the competitive lobbies are marked as such, so just avoid those.
  - germinalphrase 4y ago
    I tried playing today and the motion sickness hit me hard. Haven’t had much of a problem with it previously.

kart23 4y ago

I don’t think people fully grasp how much power and compute it takes to record and process video (me included). let me know how long that canon r5 can record for continuously, and how many batteries it’ll go through for that recording time. It wasn’t that long ago that it was taxing for desktop computers to play a 4k video file.

madeofpalk 4y ago
Still doesn't make it good.
threeseed 4y ago
With cameras the problem isn't the power or compute. It's the heat dissipation. Cameras like the Sigma FP are built around the heat sink and have vents all around to dissipate the heat during long recording sessions. Most typical DSLRs simply have recording limits e.g. Canon R6 = 30 mins. Pretty big issue for a device they are aiming to be around your head for hours at a time.
- yafbum 4y ago
  In addition to the recording limits on a DSLR, you might need to rest it for a good while if you're filming for a long time with too much light on a hot day. It shuts off when the sensor's too hot.
- into_infinity 4y ago
  The 30 minute limit had little to do with heat: https://www.fujirumors.com/yes-eu-import-duty-reason-fujifilm-x-h1-limited-30-minutes-will-change-2018-2019/ https://www.fujirumors.com/yes-eu-import-duty-reason-fujifil...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- daniel_reetz 4y ago
  Well, that's not exactly right -they're two sides of a coin. twice the pixels equals twice the power at almost every level. The pixel level, the image signal processor level, the processor, and storage.

sdrinf 4y ago

The primary use case for passthrough is not AR, it was not intended to be projecting stuff over room interior, and as such, it's crap at a thing that it is explicitely not optimized for. The primary use case for passthrough is bringing stuff into VR, specifically your hands (when used in hand tracking mode), and your keyboard. Your monitor is projected into VR by being hooked to your headset. Any other function's utility has been traded off for these purposes.

SheinhardtWigCo 4y ago
The author's point is that it's crap at a thing it's explicitly marketed as being good at.
- theptip 4y ago
  It's a weird point to spend so much ink on though. The author explicitly raises the possiblity that the marketing fluff could just be marketing fluff, but then seem to go on as if this can't be the explanation. Seems obvious to me that the "Mixed reality" stuff is just marketing fluff, if you pay any attention to the technical evolution of this product line when interpreting these complaints.
adastra22 4y ago
Source? Other “Pro” models like HoloLens are explicitly AR-only. What Pro use cases are there for VR?
- leoqa 4y ago
  I’m interested in it for a hybrid VR-AR for flight sim cockpits. The Varjo Aero is used for this, allowing you to build a cockpit replica and interact with it via pass thru but still using VR for outside the cockpit.
- RandallBrown 4y ago
  I figured the "Pro" in Meta Quest just means it's more powerful than the quest 2...

makeitdouble 4y ago

As a Quest2 user the passthrough view is only usable to find back the controllers and clear my surroundings, so I genuinely wondered how much better it got on the Pro with all the “project a secondary display” push. From these results, it looks like you’ll still be SOL if you forgot which key on your keyboard has the backtick, or try to quickly glance at your phone, or check your room’s air quality or temperature to adjust as needed. From the pictures it still looks twice nicer than the Quest2, but we’re so far away from something actually workable.

jayd16 4y ago
It's good enough to hunt and peck a keyboard but a phone screen is usually too blown out. The Pro sits off from your face more so you'd just see a phone or a keyboard through the gap anyhow.

edgefield 4y ago

A new VR arcade opened up in my area and I visited with my son. They were using HTC Vive headsets, which retail for $1,000+. It’s the first time I really used VR, especially in a couch coop mode setup. The following struck me: (1) There is no killer, must have game for VR. Beat Saber seems to be the most popular and mainstream game but not nearly engaging enough to convince the mass market to buy one or more VR headsets. Related, we cycled through about 5 games and none of graphics were particular realistic or immersive. I didn’t walk a way from the experience thinking wow! And note I’ve had this “wow” experience playing PS4 games on a higher end TV that supports HDR. (2) We had a 1 hour session with the goggles and I felt quite sea sick during and after gameplay. The headset was also uncomfortable after 30 minutes or so. Playing games while sea sick is about as much fun as it sounds. It’s pretty awful. (3) The arcade was expensive. I paid nearly $100 for 1 hour for 2 people in a MCOL area. One of the reasons for the high cost is the arcade required an employee to help us cycle through games and explain gameplay and controls. It dawned on me after the experience that my son and I would have to buy two headsets, not just one, for any couch coop play. Maybe we’d have to buy two copies of games as well? Gaming is really becoming a social experience, which is why Fortnight is such a big hit because it’s essentially free and cross platform. VR is dead in the water unless they bring to market must-have games (or other apps and Beat Saber is nowhere close to this), solve the sea sickness problem, and somehow bring down the cost so two headsets cost about as much as a current generation console. I think it’s also very premature for Meta to go after the business market. It first needs to convince geeks like me to buy and evangelize about VR. If anything, my experience at the VR arcade convinced me NOT to buy VR goggles. Good luck building out a new market if this is a typical reaction to the state of VR today.

threeseed 4y ago
a) 10 million Quest 2 devices have been sold. There is already a market. b) Business market is already a large adopter of VR devices e.g. for training, warehouses, architecture/car etc demos etc. Meta is big enough to tackle both markets at once. And Quest Pro helps to validate newer technologies that will trickle down into their cheaper models. c) Motion sickness is better on newer devices and from research videos Meta already understands what are the causes of it. It's now largely an engineering question of how to get solutions translated into shipping products.

Mizza 4y ago

I've heard that some of the AR stuff got nerfed because of the ability of IR cameras to see through some fabrics and Facebook not wanting to have those headlines in the newspapers. I just heard it as a rumour though, perhaps an insider with a throwaway account can "shed some light".

pia32 4y ago
While I don't have insider info, I highly doubt this. The Quest 2 (which I own) uses monochrome cameras without IR cut filters, and they do passthrough with those. So any problems with privacy would have been found already with the current device.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
LordDragonfang 4y ago
That was the projected-IR depth sensors that got removed. It's unclear how those would affect the image quality here.

amelius 4y ago

How good is the resolution? Can you already use the device as a monitor-replacement? (I.e., coding behind a virtual monitor on an exotic location, while you're just at home behind the desk)

modeless 4y ago
The angular resolution is much worse than typical monitors, and the comfort is not really there. You'll want to wait a couple more generations.
vineyardmike 4y ago
It is good enough that you can imagine the possibility of using it. Not good enough to actually use it like this (IMO/IME- There’s stories here of people doing this). A few generations and it’ll be doable.
zmmmmm 4y ago
It's just usable as a monitor replacement, but it would be a big stretch to say it's "better". If you have even a cheap a monitor available you'd nearly always be better off actually using it. The scenario where it's better are going to be specific use cases like: - it's helpful to have it be gigantic - bigger than a real monitor could ever be - you have a real need for more monitors than would be practical to buy or position in your work environment - you will be highly mobile and moving around so much that it's going to be better to take a headset with you than try to get monitors everwhere - you really would like to collaborate with someone else who also has a Quest Pro, in which case you can work together without being physically together - you highly benefit from / enjoy working in alternative environments (eg: being highly focused, free of distractions, relaxed, surrounded by beatiful scenery etc) I actually find the latter point is the biggest reason I do it. Even when I'm surrounded by distractions I can go into a completely calm virtual environment and get a crap load of work done.
- joewhatkins 4y ago
  Just adding my two cents here - I bought a quest pro hoping to use it as a monitor replacement while traveling for a couple of months. I found it pretty much unworkable after trying to make it work across multiple different virtual desktop apps. You can get something up and running - but it feels akin to staring at a 1080p screen with a weird delay. I felt way more productive just looking at my tiny laptop screen. Your mileage may vary, obviously. I really liked the idea of working in a distraction free virtual environment, but I feel like the tech isn’t there yet unless you’re an enthusiast whose willing to put up with all of the strangeness.

brasic 4y ago

(Edit: the tearing is not visible through the device, so quite a bit less damning than I thought.) The tear and color lag on this picture of a moving chart is damning: https://i0.wp.com/kguttag.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/MQP-frame-roll.jpg https://i0.wp.com/kguttag.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/MQP... As is this quote: > I also ran a small experiment where I sent a camera flash off in a dimly lit room and measured the delay with light sensors using one sensor to trigger an oscilloscope’s capture and the second light sensor to capture the display response. It typically took a little over four 90Hz frame times (~40 to 50ms) for the flash to show up on the image.

charcircuit 4y ago
The tear is an artifact with how the screen capture works. The tear is not actually sent to the display. People who capture Quest footage using scrcpy are well aware of this downside compared to using the built in recording feature which doesn't have the same tearing issue.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- brasic 4y ago
  Thanks, I missed that. Posted an edit at the top of my comment.

zmmmmm 4y ago

The author persistently conflates AR and MR throughout the posting, evaluating the Quest Pro as an AR device but the concluding at the end it's a terrible "MR" device because it failed at their AR tests. It seems to suggest they really think these terms are synonymous but they aren't. While AR aims to enable display and interaction with the real world but with augmentations, MR aims to bring virtual objects into the real world and allow you to interact with those. You really don't need such a high fidelity view of the real world to do that. The virtual objects are rendered with very high fidelity. I am fairly confused by the low res cameras used in the QPro. I have to assume Meta were just heavily constrained by the need for them to do double duty as tracking cameras and pass through cameras, so higher quality cameras just weren't available. But why only a single color pass through camera? This really doesn't make much sense other than if you allow that the processor on the Quest Pro is so limited that even if it had both feeds it probably couldn't process them. I think it's actually great news that there is so much optimization left to do. Seems like they should be able to improve it a lot over time, and in the meantime it's pretty adequate to enable exploration of some unique experiences. edit: VR => MR

charcircuit 4y ago
This blog post is written by Karl Guttag who is someone who is interested in AR, but not very interested in VR. The reason he is coming at it from an AR angle is that is what kind of device he is looking for. If you look at the rest of his blog you can see many articles related to AR.
- kakali 4y ago
  That’s fine, but it’s okay to call out the author’s bias. They contributed wonderful tests of the limitations of the headset. But the headset is only a failure for the authors use case. (AR)
  - charcircuit 4y ago
    I agree. If you know the author the bias is clear, but it's okay to point it out for people who are not familiar with him.

sheerun 4y ago

Can confirm, I've returned mine

jejeyyy77 4y ago
I love mine!

localhost 4y ago

I did some calculations this morning after reading The Information's (paywalled, sorry) article [1] on the Apple VR device which has 4K per eye resolution. My 27" 4K monitor sits about 28 inches away from my eyes on my desk. This translates into about 46 degree field of view, or about 83 pixels per degree. I can't see pixels at that distance. If we take 60 pixels per degree as the Apple "Retina" standard, and if we assume that the field of view of the Apple VR device is ideal (120 degrees), then we would need a horizontal resolution of ~7k to match my setup at the "Retina" standard. If you compromise a bit on FOV, you can squeeze it down to 6k, which is within the reach of "today's" current display technology [2]. The Apple VR device is rumored to be powered by some custom silicon with foveated rendering optimizations (render only what you are looking at with the highest resolution) and is maxing out an M2 class GPU with unknown # of GPU cores on the device per The Information article. A doubling of GPU performance may get us to the 6K display per eye, optimistically the v2 of the Apple VR device? [1] https://www.theinformation.com/articles/inside-the-tech-powering-apples-envelope-pushing-risky-mixed-reality-headset https://www.theinformation.com/articles/inside-the-tech-powe... [2] https://www.roadtovr.com/pimax-reality-12k-qled-announcement-release-date-price-specs/ https://www.roadtovr.com/pimax-reality-12k-qled-announcement...

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

jupp0r 4y ago

In spite of all the negativity, I'm super excited about the future of AR. - being able to see in extremely wide spectrum bands compared to human eyesight - being able to see in higher dynamic ranges than the human eye - being able to magnify little details and thus see with a higher spatial resolution than the human eye - all of this while enhancing your field of view with lots of other interesting information

wahnfrieden 4y ago
aren't these all reliant on scientific breakthroughs? they're scifi features that we're unsure we'll achieve. promising direction to pursue though edit: minus IR/thermal
- LordDragonfang 4y ago
  All of these are possible, individually, with current technology (e.g. "being able to see in extremely wide spectrum bands compared to human eyesight" means IR/nightvision cameras), but it's currently cost-prohibitive to combine them all into one device
  - jupp0r 4y ago
    A lot of camera technology that was cost prohibitive a few years ago is now in every smartphone. Remember 4k video cameras costing >$100k?
    - LordDragonfang 4y ago
      ...That's exactly GP's point, yes.
- NavinF 4y ago
  You've never used a thermal camera?
vineyardmike 4y ago
None of these seem like things any company is actually working on…? Or at least no rumor has ever mentioned. (Yes thermal cameras exist, but not really as an AR overlay)

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

semireg 4y ago

I’m not a AR/VR bull but I think Apple’s position is extremely underestimated. It’s almost like every Apple product has been developed and refined for the future AR/VR moment. Custom silicon. Fast camera HDR. LiDAR. People/scene/room/boundary detection. AirPod Max fit and finish. Spatial audio. 50 other things… All in the service of AR/VR.

Bilal_io 4y ago
I personally think Apple is very capable. The issue is they'll build a good enough VR then put it within their walled garden.
- kibwen 4y ago
  Having used Apple software, I'm honestly not convinced of Apple's ability to deliver anything half as sophisticated as VR.
  - vineyardmike 4y ago
    Having used some of apples existing AR stuff… I would believe they can ship their existing AR stuff and figure out how to make 2 screens that are nearly identical display the data.
acer589 4y ago
Yeah, when I look at the processing stuff they're doing on passthrough on AirPods, they are 100% much deeper on AR than most people think.
likeabbas 4y ago
Dedicated Neural Processors on iPhones. Constant focus on improving battery life with awesome performance. Wearables that work best when using the iPhone as the main hub. Apple is absolutely gearing up to dominate AR by having a sleek set of glasses that use your iPhone for the graphics rendering. And they'll succeed.
- 4y ago

cycomanic 4y ago

As a side note, has anyone seen a test/review of the simula one (https://simulavr.com/ https://simulavr.com/)? I think they actually have the correct ideas about making a business/developer headset and I'm seriously considering pre-ordering (but have had quite bad experiences with pre-ordering in the past, so have been holding off for now).

georgewsinger 4y ago
Though we finished our first Simula One "Review Unit" back in September (this being a stripped down prototype which demonstrates display, optics, and main board functionality), we haven't released a prototype to testers yet due to it being too unpolished. You can see some videos of it in action however here[1]. Here are some things on the horizon for us to finish before we release test units to YouTubers: - Add an IPD adjustment mechanism[2]. Currently, our prototype's IPD is locked in place until we add this functionality, which makes it really poor for testing since there's lots of variation in IPD. - Incorporate our front-facing cameras for our AR Mode. On this front, we recently shipped our Camera Boards to PCB fab[3]. Note that our cameras support 2448x2048 per eye resolution, and are placed more directly over the eyes than the Quest Pro (avoiding the issues discussed in the parent post). For a fuller comparison against the Quest Pro see[4]. - Replace our FPGA eval board with our own custom FPGA. (Just started on this; will likely discuss it during our next blog update). - Integrate our detachable compute pack to the back of the headset (right now our compute pack is just dangling). So all in all, while much of the core functionality is there, our headset is still too unpolished to send to YouTubers. Also: I understand your skepticism RE preordering. We try to keep a consistent stream of blog updates to at least let people know what's going on engineering wise. [1] https://simulavr.com/blog/first-glimpse-of-review-units/ https://simulavr.com/blog/first-glimpse-of-review-units/ [2] https://simulavr.com/blog/simula-one-auto-ipd-adjustment/ https://simulavr.com/blog/simula-one-auto-ipd-adjustment/ [3] https://simulavr.com/blog/camera-boards-submitted/ https://simulavr.com/blog/camera-boards-submitted/ [4] https://simulavr.com/blog/simula-one-vs-quest-pro/ https://simulavr.com/blog/simula-one-vs-quest-pro/
- cycomanic 4y ago
  Thanks for the reply and detailed info. I possibly have a job change lined up, will have a serious look again if that goes through.

nl 4y ago

I've been a complete cynic of VR/AR since in started. I just didn't see any point to it ourside games (which don't interest me). But someone in our office had a Quest Pro and I was blown away. It's the first time I've ever felt like I wanted to use or build thing in or for VR, and it was the Mixed Reality mode that make it like that. Unlike this review, I found mixed review very impressive. I suspect it was because I was viewing it primarily as a VR device with just some limited capability for real world interaction as opposed to an AR device. I think when viewed through a VR-first lens it's very impressive. I still don't know what I'd actually want to use it for, but it was the first time I felt like Meta might be actually onto something.

bni 4y ago
Games is the point and is all VR is good for for the foreseeable future. The problem is that Meta are not content with that, they want it to be some "social" thing so they can make $$$ instead of just $

choppaface 4y ago

Super compelling screenshots, but isn’t the thesis of “Meta Quest Pro (not?) viable for work” best proven out by somebody actually doing a shiny project using one? And if nobody does then maybe it really is for sure snake oil? For example the the pix comparing the headset to high-end Canon VR180 .. that suggests maybe the viz should just be bigger? Great write-up about the faults, but there’s gotta be a work task that can work? Beyond beat saber?

bostonbot 4y ago

I agree with most of the points here. I think Meta is missing the point with their uncanny valley avatars and focus on business applications. Personal connection like events and fitness training is key. These applications don’t rely on high definition. MR fitness is going to skyrocket this year and next year with color pass through. Checkout Liteboxer and how they are using chroma keyed trainers to make it feel like they are in your home. The quest pro is better balanced and touches your face less too.

yalogin 4y ago

Is it possible they pivoted from a consumer device to a business device mid stream and so did not do justice to the functionality? They probably should have waited to iron out the issues before releasing.

LukeWalsh 4y ago

The product (marketing) decision to focus on AR passthrough does seem really strange. If I was going to use a VR device for work, then, maybe if the resolution was high enough it could be nice to have much more space, but, I'd really only care that I'm not bumping into things. I'm not exactly sure why this AR route is being pushed before it's ready -- living in the world through cameras seems like a much harder problem to be solved after getting the base VR case to work. IMO the more interesting business cases would be around simulated environments even as simple as viewing 360 videos for places where workers would be expected to know what's going on when they enter. Thanks for the detailed analysis!

oogabooga13 4y ago

Having a virtual movie theater has been the killer feature for me. I sit in on my comfy couch and stream movies from my computer into the headset. Awesome. For me it is better than buying a real TV for the purpose of movie watching. Also VR Chat (also an app) has been awesome for connecting and talking with new people. Environments from orbiting high above the earth in space to a rooftop restauraunt in Paris make it fun to spend a few hours with new people. As other have said, inside other VR application there is a lot of "neat" "potential" but hampered execution due to software, hardware, or both. I always tell people we've made some gigantic leaps but we're still in the early stages.

hoseja 4y ago

Why does it seem so hard to put decent cameras into anything that isn't a smartphone? Webcams, this, ...

Nevermark 4y ago

The eye test is hilarious - the true test of AR! But I love my Meta Quest Pro because I love the Oculus 2 for fitness VR and the Pro is incrementally noticeably better And the humble AR is fantastic for minimal interactions like physically orienting or real world communication in a pinch (ironically!) it vaguely resembles being there ... because I am? I have yet to run a Meta social VR or AR app. Too scared I will run into a creepy Zuckertar!!!

esskay 4y ago

I really, really hope that whatever Apple ends up releasing completely wipes the floor with Meta's headsets. They need some real competition to force them to really push the limits. It's going to be interesting to see what happens if the rumors about Apple's being extremely lightweight are true - it wouldn't be surprising if it is given their tiny but efficient SOC design. This is what will kill Meta if they arent careful. They're about to get a competitor who's able to deliver performance levels significantly higher, and at lower power consumption and weight.

diziet 4y ago
Not having the battery be on the device but plugged in the phone or on a waist strap, and using more expensive, but smaller pancake vs fresnel lenses can make the effected perceived weight a lot.
- esskay 4y ago
  From the sounds of it it'll be built in. I'd assume it'll be on the rear though to balance the weight out.

alex_suzuki 4y ago

This read almost like a paid hit against Meta, ordered by a competitor. With just a quick jab at Magic Leap for plausible deniability…

weakfortress 4y ago

[dead]

hardsnow 4y ago

As someone with first-hand experience in implementing pass-through AR, I found the review well-made (e.g., they measured photon-to-photon latency) and extremely interesting. Here's a few observations I made: 1. 30 Hz frame rate and 50ms photon-to-photon latency sound so bad that I'm surprised they launched this at all. I would be very interested in trying this out to see how (un)comfortable the experience is. What I would have expected is pass-through feed rate synchronized to display frame rate (i.e., 90 Hz) and photon-to-photon latency no more than perhaps 2 frames (22ms). At 90 Hz and 11ms you can actually play ping-pong while wearing a pass-through headset. 2. I can relate with the exposure, saturation, and noise issues. The existing well-tuned video ISP pipes aren't suitable for low latency, and building a new one that achieves low latency and gives a good picture in indoor lighting from an essentially smartphone sensor with exposure time < 11ms and doesn't add multi-frame latency is HARD. 3. Above points to one possible explanation for the 30Hz capture; maybe they used a cheap sensor that can't produce usable picture in < 11ms exposure time (in dimly lit indoor environment) and thus had to go with 30Hz capture. Would be interesting to repeat the experiment in well-lit (outdoor) environment to see if the capture pipe kicks into a higher framerate. 4. I wonder if they do any warping to correct for the camera positions and how well that works. For AR-focused headset the ideal pass-through camera positions would approximate eye positions to minimize need for distortion. Even shifting capture positions a few centimeters forward from the eyes (which you'd need to do if you don't replace eyes with cameras or play tricks with optics) creates a subtle but noticeable effect unless corrected.