5 ms·

I’ve frequently compared modern VR headsets with cell phones of the 1980s. Big, bulky pieces of metal and glass that will one day look comical. Meanwhile this g

I’ve frequently compared modern VR headsets with cell phones of the 1980s. Big, bulky pieces of metal and glass that will one day look comical. Meanwhile this guy invents VR of the 1960s!

ClassyJacket 3y ago
I feel like the Quest could be very light if they took the Apple approach and moved the battery and computer to a pocket box. Even before any of these headsets existed I imagined most of them being that way.
- charcircuit 3y ago
  That would need quite the cable to support 6 camera video feeds, 2 display video feeds, 2 audio feeds, and some other control data in addition to power.
  - geoelectric 3y ago
    Would it? How much total throughput and power would that be, vs a skinny USB-C PD 3.2 Gen 2x2 cable that can carry a 100W or more along with 20 Gbps of data? How about 2 or 3 of them in a wrapper? The Quest can be a PCVR headset with a 3.2 Gen 1 cable, ie 5 Gbps. How different is this? I’m pretty sure outboarding most of the hardware that’s not speaker, camera, or screen is plenty doable. It just blows Meta’s selling point of making it a self-contained device. I’d probably prefer it though, especially if I could attach the outboard module to the back of the head strap as a counterweight.
    - charcircuit 3y ago
      >How different is this? Hardware decoding / encoding all of those video streams requires a lot of processing power on both ends, adds 10s of ms of latency, and makes the video quality worse.
      - Dylan16807 3y ago
        Not video encoding, raw-ish signals. Let's say DSC is allowed, which costs microseconds and is basically invisible, and can compress down to about 8 bits per pixel. That USB cable can transmit 20Gbps in each direction. The display needs to do 23 million pixels 90 times a second, and at 8 bits per pixel that's about 17Gbps. The video cameras going the other way are 13 million pixels for the main cameras plus some amount more for the 6 tracking cameras and the other sensors. And those main cameras are outputting 8 bits per pixel before any compression is applied. It's a tight fit at that bitrate, but we can upgrade to USB4 and get 40Gbps in each direction. That leaves plenty of room for everything, and makes sure there's headroom for HDR and 100Hz and whatnot. It works out.
jojobas 3y ago
Big and bulky wasn't really the problem, price was. Size/weight isn't an issue with a car-based phone, the fact that the phone was prices as much as a car is.
- ghaff 3y ago
  Size/weight wasn't an issue as long as you were basically talking about a car-phone which was a valid but specific use-case. (Back in the day, my senior manager would occasionally give me rides from my car dealer and he'd put me on the phone with various senior sales people if there was something he wanted me to have a conversation with.) But you're right that the phone plans were also out of reach for all but execs and very high net-worth individuals. Heck, until the late 90s or so, cell phone usage was pretty expensive for a random person for all but very occasional use.
  - aksss 3y ago
    Even in mid-late nineties I would have never paid for a cell phone personally (too expensive), but they were becoming cheap enough that it was common for employers to see the value in making sure you had one.
    - Jensson 3y ago
      Most kids had cell phones in mid late nineties where I lived, the phones themselves were cheap but using them were not very cheap, but giving a kid a phone so you could call them if the parent needed seemed popular.
      - jazzyjackson 3y ago
        You know I kind of forgot the dynamics of that as a 90s kid, compared to 13 year olds with iphones now. Imagine how much TikTok kids would watch if they were charged 10 cents per video.
      - michaelt 3y ago
        According to [1] (which might be incomplete, IDK) cell phone sales went from 100 million per year in 1997 to 400 million per year in 2000. Subsequently, sales rose to 1.5 billion per year. So when talking about how many people have cell phones, the difference between "mid 90s" and "late 90s" makes a big difference :) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_mobile_phones#Annual_sales_by_manufacturer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_mobile_ph...
NoPedantsThanks 3y ago
[dead]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

I’ve frequently compared modern VR headsets with cell phones of the 1980s. Big, bulky pieces of metal and glass that will one day look comical. Meanwhile this guy invents VR of the 1960s!

ClassyJacket 3y ago

I feel like the Quest could be very light if they took the Apple approach and moved the battery and computer to a pocket box. Even before any of these headsets existed I imagined most of them being that way.

charcircuit 3y ago
That would need quite the cable to support 6 camera video feeds, 2 display video feeds, 2 audio feeds, and some other control data in addition to power.
- geoelectric 3y ago
  Would it? How much total throughput and power would that be, vs a skinny USB-C PD 3.2 Gen 2x2 cable that can carry a 100W or more along with 20 Gbps of data? How about 2 or 3 of them in a wrapper? The Quest can be a PCVR headset with a 3.2 Gen 1 cable, ie 5 Gbps. How different is this? I’m pretty sure outboarding most of the hardware that’s not speaker, camera, or screen is plenty doable. It just blows Meta’s selling point of making it a self-contained device. I’d probably prefer it though, especially if I could attach the outboard module to the back of the head strap as a counterweight.
  - charcircuit 3y ago
    >How different is this? Hardware decoding / encoding all of those video streams requires a lot of processing power on both ends, adds 10s of ms of latency, and makes the video quality worse.
    - Dylan16807 3y ago
      Not video encoding, raw-ish signals. Let's say DSC is allowed, which costs microseconds and is basically invisible, and can compress down to about 8 bits per pixel. That USB cable can transmit 20Gbps in each direction. The display needs to do 23 million pixels 90 times a second, and at 8 bits per pixel that's about 17Gbps. The video cameras going the other way are 13 million pixels for the main cameras plus some amount more for the 6 tracking cameras and the other sensors. And those main cameras are outputting 8 bits per pixel before any compression is applied. It's a tight fit at that bitrate, but we can upgrade to USB4 and get 40Gbps in each direction. That leaves plenty of room for everything, and makes sure there's headroom for HDR and 100Hz and whatnot. It works out.

jojobas 3y ago

Big and bulky wasn't really the problem, price was. Size/weight isn't an issue with a car-based phone, the fact that the phone was prices as much as a car is.

ghaff 3y ago
Size/weight wasn't an issue as long as you were basically talking about a car-phone which was a valid but specific use-case. (Back in the day, my senior manager would occasionally give me rides from my car dealer and he'd put me on the phone with various senior sales people if there was something he wanted me to have a conversation with.) But you're right that the phone plans were also out of reach for all but execs and very high net-worth individuals. Heck, until the late 90s or so, cell phone usage was pretty expensive for a random person for all but very occasional use.
- aksss 3y ago
  Even in mid-late nineties I would have never paid for a cell phone personally (too expensive), but they were becoming cheap enough that it was common for employers to see the value in making sure you had one.
  - Jensson 3y ago
    Most kids had cell phones in mid late nineties where I lived, the phones themselves were cheap but using them were not very cheap, but giving a kid a phone so you could call them if the parent needed seemed popular.
    - jazzyjackson 3y ago
      You know I kind of forgot the dynamics of that as a 90s kid, compared to 13 year olds with iphones now. Imagine how much TikTok kids would watch if they were charged 10 cents per video.
    - michaelt 3y ago
      According to [1] (which might be incomplete, IDK) cell phone sales went from 100 million per year in 1997 to 400 million per year in 2000. Subsequently, sales rose to 1.5 billion per year. So when talking about how many people have cell phones, the difference between "mid 90s" and "late 90s" makes a big difference :) [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_mobile_phones#Annual_sales_by_manufacturer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_mobile_ph...

NoPedantsThanks 3y ago

[dead]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]