4 ms·

Yes, they will. The computer industry doesn’t want to repeat IBM’s loss of platform control. Mobile phones are walled gardens with very restrictive app models a

by trzy 4y ago

Yes, they will. The computer industry doesn’t want to repeat IBM’s loss of platform control. Mobile phones are walled gardens with very restrictive app models and one should expect VR and AR devices to be even more so. As an example, camera access is available on smart phones (cameras on phones being an established killer feature even before iOS and Android) but are completely off limits on all standalone VR headsets (Meta, Pico, HTC) for “privacy reasons”. Expect other big players to lean into this.

chamwislothe2nd 4y ago
[dead]
mrguyorama 4y ago
My Valve Index exposes the cameras seemingly as standard Windows USB webcams. It will accidentally show up in video calls sometimes.
- trzy 4y ago
  Not a standalone headset and not really trying to be a platform :)
davidburt 4y ago
Even so, I do think we can expect a strong open web to emerge in VR. Some publishers & businesses will want to control the content & data they publish, which will push them to the open web. It's the same reason publishers don't publish all their content on Facebook. That said, it will certainly take a while for an open web to emerge. And in any case, it seems likely that walled gardens will always have a powerful place in the ecosystem.
malermeister 4y ago
The EU will break this wide open with the Digital Markets Act. Even Apple is preparing to open their walled garden. Big players would do as you predicted if not for regulatory measures, that have thankfully been taken.
- trzy 4y ago
  Color me skeptical. What will they open up? Even side-loading of apps doesn’t necessarily remove the platform vendor’s advantage in being able to control the system experience. For example, consider the way the app model itself has been designed: apps are standalone experiences (this is a simplification because there are some integration hooks into other parts of the system UX). I can think of several use cases where I might like a background “camera app” that monitors the system camera feed for certain objects/scene features and suggests an action when detected. It’s hard to argue that Apple should have to permit such functionality but then if the debate shifts towards what first party OS level features Apple is and is not allowed to provide, we get into undesirable regulatory overreach. Ideally the OS would be open source and replaceable but that’s a pipe dream. The reality remains that platforms are intentionally crafted to heavily favor the vendor’s services and there’s little that regulation will do to change that.
nomel 4y ago
> but are completely off limits on all standalone VR headsets (Meta, Pico, HTC) for “privacy reasons”. I think a headset that has the capability of exposing live video feed to apps is a headset that will be incompatible with business environments, and definitely incompatible with my home. The consideration of "private reasons" are extremely real. I don't see why this has to be "walled" though, since a standard could be used to expose object/hand/passthrough textures/whatever tracking, via an API. I think Meta's approach is what the majority will end up using: some AR API, with passthrough regions direct to the user, but the video feed of those outlines inaccessible to the app. The alternative is a NYT article about how "There are over a dozen cameras, in your bedroom, and hackers are watching!" articles. For reference, Quest pro has 16 cameras: 6 for the controllers, four for HMD tracking, one for color passthrough, 3 for the eyes, and 2 for the mouth. Considering giving apps access seems ludicrous, to someone who sometimes plays "Puzzling Place", in their underwear.

by trzy 4y ago

chamwislothe2nd 4y ago

[dead]

mrguyorama 4y ago

My Valve Index exposes the cameras seemingly as standard Windows USB webcams. It will accidentally show up in video calls sometimes.

trzy 4y ago
Not a standalone headset and not really trying to be a platform :)

davidburt 4y ago

Even so, I do think we can expect a strong open web to emerge in VR. Some publishers & businesses will want to control the content & data they publish, which will push them to the open web. It's the same reason publishers don't publish all their content on Facebook. That said, it will certainly take a while for an open web to emerge. And in any case, it seems likely that walled gardens will always have a powerful place in the ecosystem.

malermeister 4y ago

The EU will break this wide open with the Digital Markets Act. Even Apple is preparing to open their walled garden. Big players would do as you predicted if not for regulatory measures, that have thankfully been taken.

trzy 4y ago
Color me skeptical. What will they open up? Even side-loading of apps doesn’t necessarily remove the platform vendor’s advantage in being able to control the system experience. For example, consider the way the app model itself has been designed: apps are standalone experiences (this is a simplification because there are some integration hooks into other parts of the system UX). I can think of several use cases where I might like a background “camera app” that monitors the system camera feed for certain objects/scene features and suggests an action when detected. It’s hard to argue that Apple should have to permit such functionality but then if the debate shifts towards what first party OS level features Apple is and is not allowed to provide, we get into undesirable regulatory overreach. Ideally the OS would be open source and replaceable but that’s a pipe dream. The reality remains that platforms are intentionally crafted to heavily favor the vendor’s services and there’s little that regulation will do to change that.

nomel 4y ago

> but are completely off limits on all standalone VR headsets (Meta, Pico, HTC) for “privacy reasons”. I think a headset that has the capability of exposing live video feed to apps is a headset that will be incompatible with business environments, and definitely incompatible with my home. The consideration of "private reasons" are extremely real. I don't see why this has to be "walled" though, since a standard could be used to expose object/hand/passthrough textures/whatever tracking, via an API. I think Meta's approach is what the majority will end up using: some AR API, with passthrough regions direct to the user, but the video feed of those outlines inaccessible to the app. The alternative is a NYT article about how "There are over a dozen cameras, in your bedroom, and hackers are watching!" articles. For reference, Quest pro has 16 cameras: 6 for the controllers, four for HMD tracking, one for color passthrough, 3 for the eyes, and 2 for the mouth. Considering giving apps access seems ludicrous, to someone who sometimes plays "Puzzling Place", in their underwear.