8 ms·

From Notch: > Don’t get me wrong, VR is not bad for social. In fact, I think social could become one of the biggest applications of VR. Being able to sit in a

From Notch: > Don’t get me wrong, VR is not bad for social. In fact, I think social could become one of the biggest applications of VR. Being able to sit in a virtual living room and see your friend’s avatar? Business meetings? Virtual cinemas where you feel like you’re actually watching the movie with your friend who is seven time zones away? Do people really see this as the mainstream use of VR? Do people really see a mainstream use for VR at all? I can't see it. It's not the future of computing to me. VR is incredible, it's magical and amazing. I've used the dev kits and the feeling of presence is awesome. The first time I wore the Oculus DK1 was the first time I felt teleported to a different location. Despite all this, I still don't want to use my Oculus every day — not even once a week. It's a great system but the feeling wears off once you are immersed in the actual experience. It doesn't make my communication or consumption of information any more efficient, not like the way mobile Internet devices have done. Not even like the way my graphics tablet improved my ability to be artistic with my computer. I see VR as dramatically changing a small but highly focused subset of the entertainment landscape, and being used in many niche areas (such as architectural visualisation). I can't see it replacing the way we use our computers in general. Perhaps I am just shortsighted, and I would be happy to be proven so.

meowface 13y ago
I think I agree. When it comes to video games, for people who are really into getting immersed it could see major usage. But for every day activities, I think that video conferencing and other forms of communication we already have basically cover those niches.
agumonkey 13y ago
In my imagination, computers will fade away to become as invisible as ubiquitous.
sillysaurus3 13y ago
The thing about the future is that it has a funny way of proving you wrong. I think the vision outlined above is entirely possible. An integrated microphone with surround sound headphones was going to change gamedev forever. Who knows how that would bleed into other types of scenarios than gaming? I'd watch a movie with someone using an Oculus. It'd be a fun experience.
- interpol_p 13y ago
  Yes, I think we'll have to see how the next few decades pan out to see whether the future holds more overt computing (VR, stuff stuck to your face) or more subtle computing (in your pocket, information when you need it). My money is on the latter for mainstream, with the former being reserved for a subset entertainment and niche uses. I'd watch a movie with someone using an Oculus, sounds fun. But I can't see it beating the experience I have now: once a month I invite family and friends, we cook food, sit around and use the projector to watch a good movie on a large screen. If VR can beat that experience, I could see it going mainstream for entertainment. My argument isn't that VR has no use, it most definitely does. It's that I can't see VR fundamentally changing how we use computers (like mobile has done).
  - nostromo 13y ago
    I think you're exactly right. Look at 3d television: they aren't selling. People don't want to wear glasses just to watch a movie. Which is why Google is focusing on AR not VR. The use cases for AR seem more immediately obvious and valuable to a mainstream audience. VR's killer use case is gaming. This is why I'm sad about this acquisition. Zuck's post about VR being the future of social seemed way off base. First, get gaming right, then broaden your vision. With Sony now in the space, I'm positive we'll get an announcement from Microsoft sooner than later. I'm not a huge MS guy, but to me, they are the company to look toward for getting VR gaming right.
    - jsilence 13y ago
      "I think you're exactly right. Look at 3d television: they aren't selling. People don't want to wear glasses just to watch a movie." For me, 3D does nothing to get more immersed into the story. Frankly most of the 3D movies suck. Weak plots sprinkled with in your face 3D effects. Booooring. It is about the plot and the acting. The content, not the form. Look at Hitchcocks movies. Would adding 3D do anything for them? Look at Jim Jarmushs movies or at "Lost in translation", would adding 3D do anything for those? Would adding VR do anything for those? I don't think so. In the end it is about content. Second life and "there" was all the hype around 2005 but the hype wore off. Maybe it is time for 3rd life with the OR and the myo armband now. I think it depends on whether there is something in there that makes it worth while to come back after the initial "whoa this is awesome, wow" effect wears off. For my own part, I'd love to see a VR based construction application like Sketchup where you are IN the model and build something with gestures. I'm pretty sure that would fly with the maker possy.
lnanek2 13y ago
Social seems like a more mainstream use, honestly. 73% of adults are on a social network. Only 49% of homes have a game console. Owning a game console is a choice. Owning something like a webcam and a way to browse Facebook is almost a default by now. While what happened is bad for the gaming focus, it is much more likely to end up with broad stream VR adoption just like how webcams are built into most phones and laptops nowadays.
- interpol_p 13y ago
  So you are suggesting that most people will strap on a headset to consume social information of the type they currently consume on Facebook? (Photos of real life events, the thoughts and feelings of others, commentary on recent news, memes.) Edit: just because social is a bigger area than gaming, does not mean VR is more likely to take off in that area. It entirely depends on how you actually use it and what experience it gives you. You could argue that video calls would kill voice calls because video calls are "more immersive". Obviously that didn't happen. You could also argue that voice calls would kill text communication, because obviously talking with your voice is more natural. Again, it didn't happen - text communication is bigger than ever, look at WhatsApp. In the space of social, ease and speed of consumption trumps immersion.
  - hackinthebochs 13y ago
    >So you are suggesting that most people will strap on a headset to consume social information of the type they currently consume on Facebook Why do you think it would look anything like what we currently consider social networking? Why are people so painfully short-sighted? I have said many times that facebook won the social network wars long before google even released google+. Anything that comes along to kill facebook will look nothing like what we consider social networking today. It looks like facebook may be the one to invent its own killer.
    - interpol_p 13y ago
      > Why do you think it would look anything like what we currently consider social networking? Why are people so painfully short-sighted? Even if it's the same as putting on a pair of sunglasses, it's still too much for me. If it's a matter of me just closing my eyes and experiencing what I want, then I agree with you. But I don't think that's even the same direction as the VR we are discussing. Edit: I misunderstood, I thought you were talking about improvements to VR hardware. However, seeing social networking and VR mesh together — even some hypothetical social networking of the future — seems an odd direction to me. VR is very inhuman in terms of the physical experience, social networking is very brief and notification oriented. I can't see the two a match. VR is great, I use it and love playing with it. I don't want it to be involved in my social experiences unless it's the following: inviting people around to try cool VR demos while watching what they are experiencing on a large screen, that is fun.
prawn 13y ago
I can see myself, a few years in the future, using a VR headset daily. Watching movies, reading articles in a different format (just lying there rather than having to hold a book, Kindle or phone/tablet), watching something like TV with augmented social info, playing games, etc. Years beyond that, if the resolution is there, I think virtual displays will replace the way many of us currently do work.
- interpol_p 13y ago
  I don't share your opinion, but have some colleagues who do. I love VR and own the dev kit. I love playing with it. I like to watch movies and TV shows with friends and family, not alone. I cannot see VR as advantageous for the work I do: design, programming, painting, writing. I enjoy working outside or in cafes, where there are people and noises and things to eat and drink. Places to walk. Most of my programming happens when I step away from computers. When I'm at a computer all I am doing is transcribing code and design, not being creative.
  - prawn 13y ago
    But surely you can see that, if not a majority, a significant minority will use VR in the way I've described and push it along quite quickly? A decent number of people are more comfortable texting or emailing than they are calling. They prefer quiet social settings over busy ones. Many favour time alone. My wife and I sometimes watch TV/movies together, often separately - in the latter instances, I'd quite happily do this via VR goggles and headphones, either immersed or with a virtual display. My brother lives in a different state to me. I'd really like to watch movies in a virtual cinema with a voice channel overlay so we could talk crap about what we were watching. Reading in bed or on the couch, I'd be keen to try doing that via goggles rather than holding a device.
mahyarm 13y ago
I could also see it used as a "more compact" 2lbs laptop where you could have that portable 50" screen you always wanted, with cameras embedded in the headset so your not blinded. It would also allow you to not be hunched over in a portable situation, not require a desk per say and be outdoors without screen brightness issues, which are all issues with laptops.
foobarian 13y ago
Let's not forget that other application area that has historically proven very helpful at driving early adoption of new media. From the Gutenberg press, through celluloid, CDs, GIFs, to the Internet. Hint: starts with 'p', ends with 'orn.'
- mcphage 13y ago
  mcphages-mbp:~ mcphage$ cat /usr/share/dict/words | grep '^p.*orn$' palpicorn peppercorn pibcorn pilcorn plenicorn plumicorn popcorn preadorn preborn prestubborn pronghorn Hmm... I think you mean "peppercorn", yah? Those motivated a lot of international trade.
  - issa 13y ago
    My new best friend.
  - gsg 13y ago
    Wait. What the hell is a "plumicorn"? "An ear tuft of feathers, as in the horned owls." I... didn't realise there was a word for that.
ohwp 13y ago
Nobody can make predictions so it's also hard to see where the future is going. 'People watching a mobile device all the time!?' Look at we are now... I wouldn't be surprised when we will be programming with a VR set so you can put almost unlimited lines of code on your retina.
- rimantas 13y ago
  What's the point of putting unlimited lines of code on your retina, when your ability to comprehend them does not change a bit?
- deong 13y ago
  > Nobody can make predictions so it's also hard to see where the future is going. People make predictions all the time, many of them pretty good. Did a significant number of people think Color was going to be a smashing success? I'll happily predict that the Pono is going to fail pretty thoroughly, because I simply don't believe many people are going to spend tons of money on clunky hardware that plays very expensive music at dubiously appreciable improvements in quality when they already carry a phone that has unfettered access to way more music at lower prices at quality they already think is fine. Likewise, if anyone wants to take my $100 on a bet that in 2019, we won't be strapping a scuba mask onto our face to use Facebook, it's available.
pjc50 13y ago
I think you're entirely right. As other people have said, we're forgetting the previous VR boom, and also the various times Hollywood has tried to make 3D films stick. 3D TVs are currently flagging in sales. In my cupboard of "tech that was once must-have", I have a Kinect, a Wii Fit, a dancemat, and an NVIDIA 3D shutter-glasses set. I suspect VR will end up there too.
- mercer 13y ago
  I'd say the big issue with 3D films is that the '3D' is simply not good nor ubiquitous enough to justify buying and then wearing a geeky headset, or an expensive 3D TV. Not to mention the fact that there's a huge difference between full 3D in a rendered environment and semi-3D on a flat screen. And while I know very little about the previous VR boom, I suspect there were some significant issues that only recently have been solved (FPS, nausea, device size and price?). In the same way that it took phone functionality as a trojan horse to mass tablet adoption, gaming might finally make 3D development gain critical mass with consumers. To be fair, I haven't ever tried one so I can't comment on the experience itself. But from what I've heard, the developments in VR have scaled significant hurdles that make it something exciting and viable. I think history has shown that sometimes seemingly-small developments in 'input' or 'output' can have a huge effect: fingers for touch screens (one of the biggest reasons for the iPhone's success, I think), a mouse and a GUI for computers (initially gathering dust in a research lab, if my history is correct), and arguably even something like retina displays. Very often we underestimate the value of these developments, especially us geeks who are right on top of things and follow the small increments: "iPhone? I had a PDA x years ago (stylus though, but that's a minor detail)," or "tablet? it's just a bigger touch phone!" (apologies for mostly using Apple as an example. I'm sure there are many others, but these just spring to mind.)

meowface 13y ago

I think I agree. When it comes to video games, for people who are really into getting immersed it could see major usage. But for every day activities, I think that video conferencing and other forms of communication we already have basically cover those niches.

agumonkey 13y ago

In my imagination, computers will fade away to become as invisible as ubiquitous.

sillysaurus3 13y ago

The thing about the future is that it has a funny way of proving you wrong. I think the vision outlined above is entirely possible. An integrated microphone with surround sound headphones was going to change gamedev forever. Who knows how that would bleed into other types of scenarios than gaming? I'd watch a movie with someone using an Oculus. It'd be a fun experience.

interpol_p 13y ago
Yes, I think we'll have to see how the next few decades pan out to see whether the future holds more overt computing (VR, stuff stuck to your face) or more subtle computing (in your pocket, information when you need it). My money is on the latter for mainstream, with the former being reserved for a subset entertainment and niche uses. I'd watch a movie with someone using an Oculus, sounds fun. But I can't see it beating the experience I have now: once a month I invite family and friends, we cook food, sit around and use the projector to watch a good movie on a large screen. If VR can beat that experience, I could see it going mainstream for entertainment. My argument isn't that VR has no use, it most definitely does. It's that I can't see VR fundamentally changing how we use computers (like mobile has done).
- nostromo 13y ago
  I think you're exactly right. Look at 3d television: they aren't selling. People don't want to wear glasses just to watch a movie. Which is why Google is focusing on AR not VR. The use cases for AR seem more immediately obvious and valuable to a mainstream audience. VR's killer use case is gaming. This is why I'm sad about this acquisition. Zuck's post about VR being the future of social seemed way off base. First, get gaming right, then broaden your vision. With Sony now in the space, I'm positive we'll get an announcement from Microsoft sooner than later. I'm not a huge MS guy, but to me, they are the company to look toward for getting VR gaming right.
  - jsilence 13y ago
    "I think you're exactly right. Look at 3d television: they aren't selling. People don't want to wear glasses just to watch a movie." For me, 3D does nothing to get more immersed into the story. Frankly most of the 3D movies suck. Weak plots sprinkled with in your face 3D effects. Booooring. It is about the plot and the acting. The content, not the form. Look at Hitchcocks movies. Would adding 3D do anything for them? Look at Jim Jarmushs movies or at "Lost in translation", would adding 3D do anything for those? Would adding VR do anything for those? I don't think so. In the end it is about content. Second life and "there" was all the hype around 2005 but the hype wore off. Maybe it is time for 3rd life with the OR and the myo armband now. I think it depends on whether there is something in there that makes it worth while to come back after the initial "whoa this is awesome, wow" effect wears off. For my own part, I'd love to see a VR based construction application like Sketchup where you are IN the model and build something with gestures. I'm pretty sure that would fly with the maker possy.

lnanek2 13y ago

Social seems like a more mainstream use, honestly. 73% of adults are on a social network. Only 49% of homes have a game console. Owning a game console is a choice. Owning something like a webcam and a way to browse Facebook is almost a default by now. While what happened is bad for the gaming focus, it is much more likely to end up with broad stream VR adoption just like how webcams are built into most phones and laptops nowadays.

interpol_p 13y ago
So you are suggesting that most people will strap on a headset to consume social information of the type they currently consume on Facebook? (Photos of real life events, the thoughts and feelings of others, commentary on recent news, memes.) Edit: just because social is a bigger area than gaming, does not mean VR is more likely to take off in that area. It entirely depends on how you actually use it and what experience it gives you. You could argue that video calls would kill voice calls because video calls are "more immersive". Obviously that didn't happen. You could also argue that voice calls would kill text communication, because obviously talking with your voice is more natural. Again, it didn't happen - text communication is bigger than ever, look at WhatsApp. In the space of social, ease and speed of consumption trumps immersion.
- hackinthebochs 13y ago
  >So you are suggesting that most people will strap on a headset to consume social information of the type they currently consume on Facebook Why do you think it would look anything like what we currently consider social networking? Why are people so painfully short-sighted? I have said many times that facebook won the social network wars long before google even released google+. Anything that comes along to kill facebook will look nothing like what we consider social networking today. It looks like facebook may be the one to invent its own killer.
  - interpol_p 13y ago
    > Why do you think it would look anything like what we currently consider social networking? Why are people so painfully short-sighted? Even if it's the same as putting on a pair of sunglasses, it's still too much for me. If it's a matter of me just closing my eyes and experiencing what I want, then I agree with you. But I don't think that's even the same direction as the VR we are discussing. Edit: I misunderstood, I thought you were talking about improvements to VR hardware. However, seeing social networking and VR mesh together — even some hypothetical social networking of the future — seems an odd direction to me. VR is very inhuman in terms of the physical experience, social networking is very brief and notification oriented. I can't see the two a match. VR is great, I use it and love playing with it. I don't want it to be involved in my social experiences unless it's the following: inviting people around to try cool VR demos while watching what they are experiencing on a large screen, that is fun.

prawn 13y ago

I can see myself, a few years in the future, using a VR headset daily. Watching movies, reading articles in a different format (just lying there rather than having to hold a book, Kindle or phone/tablet), watching something like TV with augmented social info, playing games, etc. Years beyond that, if the resolution is there, I think virtual displays will replace the way many of us currently do work.

interpol_p 13y ago
I don't share your opinion, but have some colleagues who do. I love VR and own the dev kit. I love playing with it. I like to watch movies and TV shows with friends and family, not alone. I cannot see VR as advantageous for the work I do: design, programming, painting, writing. I enjoy working outside or in cafes, where there are people and noises and things to eat and drink. Places to walk. Most of my programming happens when I step away from computers. When I'm at a computer all I am doing is transcribing code and design, not being creative.
- prawn 13y ago
  But surely you can see that, if not a majority, a significant minority will use VR in the way I've described and push it along quite quickly? A decent number of people are more comfortable texting or emailing than they are calling. They prefer quiet social settings over busy ones. Many favour time alone. My wife and I sometimes watch TV/movies together, often separately - in the latter instances, I'd quite happily do this via VR goggles and headphones, either immersed or with a virtual display. My brother lives in a different state to me. I'd really like to watch movies in a virtual cinema with a voice channel overlay so we could talk crap about what we were watching. Reading in bed or on the couch, I'd be keen to try doing that via goggles rather than holding a device.

mahyarm 13y ago

I could also see it used as a "more compact" 2lbs laptop where you could have that portable 50" screen you always wanted, with cameras embedded in the headset so your not blinded. It would also allow you to not be hunched over in a portable situation, not require a desk per say and be outdoors without screen brightness issues, which are all issues with laptops.

foobarian 13y ago

Let's not forget that other application area that has historically proven very helpful at driving early adoption of new media. From the Gutenberg press, through celluloid, CDs, GIFs, to the Internet. Hint: starts with 'p', ends with 'orn.'

mcphage 13y ago
mcphages-mbp:~ mcphage$ cat /usr/share/dict/words | grep '^p.*orn$' palpicorn peppercorn pibcorn pilcorn plenicorn plumicorn popcorn preadorn preborn prestubborn pronghorn Hmm... I think you mean "peppercorn", yah? Those motivated a lot of international trade.
- issa 13y ago
  My new best friend.
- gsg 13y ago
  Wait. What the hell is a "plumicorn"? "An ear tuft of feathers, as in the horned owls." I... didn't realise there was a word for that.

ohwp 13y ago

Nobody can make predictions so it's also hard to see where the future is going. 'People watching a mobile device all the time!?' Look at we are now... I wouldn't be surprised when we will be programming with a VR set so you can put almost unlimited lines of code on your retina.

rimantas 13y ago
What's the point of putting unlimited lines of code on your retina, when your ability to comprehend them does not change a bit?
deong 13y ago
> Nobody can make predictions so it's also hard to see where the future is going. People make predictions all the time, many of them pretty good. Did a significant number of people think Color was going to be a smashing success? I'll happily predict that the Pono is going to fail pretty thoroughly, because I simply don't believe many people are going to spend tons of money on clunky hardware that plays very expensive music at dubiously appreciable improvements in quality when they already carry a phone that has unfettered access to way more music at lower prices at quality they already think is fine. Likewise, if anyone wants to take my $100 on a bet that in 2019, we won't be strapping a scuba mask onto our face to use Facebook, it's available.

pjc50 13y ago

I think you're entirely right. As other people have said, we're forgetting the previous VR boom, and also the various times Hollywood has tried to make 3D films stick. 3D TVs are currently flagging in sales. In my cupboard of "tech that was once must-have", I have a Kinect, a Wii Fit, a dancemat, and an NVIDIA 3D shutter-glasses set. I suspect VR will end up there too.

mercer 13y ago
I'd say the big issue with 3D films is that the '3D' is simply not good nor ubiquitous enough to justify buying and then wearing a geeky headset, or an expensive 3D TV. Not to mention the fact that there's a huge difference between full 3D in a rendered environment and semi-3D on a flat screen. And while I know very little about the previous VR boom, I suspect there were some significant issues that only recently have been solved (FPS, nausea, device size and price?). In the same way that it took phone functionality as a trojan horse to mass tablet adoption, gaming might finally make 3D development gain critical mass with consumers. To be fair, I haven't ever tried one so I can't comment on the experience itself. But from what I've heard, the developments in VR have scaled significant hurdles that make it something exciting and viable. I think history has shown that sometimes seemingly-small developments in 'input' or 'output' can have a huge effect: fingers for touch screens (one of the biggest reasons for the iPhone's success, I think), a mouse and a GUI for computers (initially gathering dust in a research lab, if my history is correct), and arguably even something like retina displays. Very often we underestimate the value of these developments, especially us geeks who are right on top of things and follow the small increments: "iPhone? I had a PDA x years ago (stylus though, but that's a minor detail)," or "tablet? it's just a bigger touch phone!" (apologies for mostly using Apple as an example. I'm sure there are many others, but these just spring to mind.)