ptom
Joined 5 years ago
Joined 5 years ago
For me it comes down to functionality, focus, comfort, and productivity. Convenience too, but it took a lot of setup and tuning to get to that point, so the net "convenience" gain is probably neutral. These days I don't want to work any other way.
The Quest 2 is remarkably capable for its form factor, but has some significant limitations and requires a lot of babysitting to get it tuned "just so" to make it that productive. Reaching that flow state, or even making it more productive than a traditional physical screen layout, isn't particularly accessible, certainly not yet on a mass appeal level. So yeah, it can work, but there's a LOT of room for improvement.
1. WiFi direct, or as direct as you can make it - which means the computer is either the AP itself, or wired directly to it in order to keep the hops short.
2. Measurement can be done via a companion ping that looks at frame timing, but that's kind of a secondary measure. Best way to really check it is with high-speed video capture of a hardware display and the mirrored content in the headset, of a high-(temporal-)resolution stopwatch. I can also watch a YouTube video streamed with the desktop to the headset, and listen to it on headphones wired straight to the laptop, with no discernible offset (and this is with years of audio engineering experience) - the error bars on that subjective experience are much larger, but demonstrate that it's at least usable.
3. Hardware acceleration, via Nvidia NVENC, and rather than use Immersed's own virtual screen tech, I usually rely on HDMI dummy plugs ($12 for a 3 pack) to maximize GPU throughput (and not cannibalize CPU cycles).
4. Not ALL content is going to move at this speed even in the best of circumstances - I have a low overall rate of change, which means the delta streaming of the NVENC encoder is super short: not much data to grab, not much data to send.
I can absolutely get worse rates than this if I want to push a ton of video content, or if I were to use it for gaming, etc. I don't think everyone would have this level of performance for every use case, but it's what I've been able to achieve and maintain.
There's a lot of VR content I still can't handle, even though I've built a tolerance to many others. But for a stationary experience like productivity, where I at most walk in a very small area while at the standing desk, it's not applicable - I'm running 100fps+, and the 6DoF tracking does an excellent job.
As for the FB devices - available audience and cost of doing business. They also support the Vive Focus 3 now though, and others are in the works.
> Every Oculus Quest for business costs $999.
https://skarredghost.com/2020/05/22/oculus-business-vr-price...
As an accessibility tool I'm delighted to see it working for another migraine sufferer though.
The only 2 that run this particular software right now are the Quest, and the Vive Focus 3 (which cost $1000 more). There are other virtual office interface options available, though, and those run on WMR or any Steam compatible headset.
None others that support Linux that I'm aware of, though.
[email protected]