I'd like a dev environment to be made in oculus rift. Why simply limit ourselves to games (though very cool and fun)? To me it seems like the oculus allows for an entirely separate reality to be created. Imagine putting on the rift and instead of your desktop you can have a wall with 100 monitors in it? Move you editor to the side have a build above you etc...
I bought on to the Kickstarter with the express intention of doing just that.
I sold mine. In 5 years, maybe I'll try again. It needs 2-3 generations of improvement, at least, before it's suitable for development work. Currently, the resolution is so bad you can't even display legible text within the 3d world.
Well, the point behind the currently-available revision is that it's a rough model for developers to build things that will look better on the higher-def release model.
By all accounts, the HD prototype that's floating around looks really, really swell.
I have no doubt it does, for games. But due to the nature of its optics, the perceived resolution of the Rift will still not be up to snuff for a while. You're essentially looking at the screen through a magnifying glass; I'm not sure there's any display with a good-enough pixel density out there, yet.
Thanks for saying this. I've tried the developer version and while it was great fun the resolution, screen door and shimmer issues were really disappointing.
I agree that it needs a couple of generations of improvement before it becomes useful for text. And if you check the specs of the "HD" version it's not going to be sufficiently improved to make the difference.
A friend told me this the other day as well. It is rather limitless... and sounds amazing to code in. You could even have great visualizations for things such as working with the different branches of code. As in the "zone" as you can get. You can change thhe scenery to whatever as well. Dark room? Done. Wonderful vista? Done.
It's not that farfetched to imagine a future where plenty of programmers sit 'jacked' in, into an Oculus Rift to code.
Though I immediately thought of the corresponding passage in Snow Crash. :)
But his real reason for being in Flatland is that Hiro Protagonist,
last of the freelance hackers, is hacking. And when hackers are hacking,
they don't mess around with the superficial world of Metaverses and avatars.
They descend below this surface layer and into the netherworld of code and
tangled nam-shubs that supports it, where everything that you see in the
Metaverse, no matter how lifelike and beautiful and three-dimensional,
reduces to a simple text file: a series of letters on an electronic page. It
is a throwback to the days when people programmed computers through
primitive teletypes and IBM punch cards.
Since then, pretty and user-friendly programming tools have been
developed. It's possible to program a computer now by sitting at your desk
in the Metaverse and manually connecting little preprogrammed units, like
Tinkertoys. But a real hacker would never use such techniques, any more than
a master auto mechanic would try to fix a car by sliding in behind the
steering wheel and watching the idiot lights on the dashboard.
It is a great idea, but I think the Rift will need to get a wildly better resolution. A 1920x1080 real screen isn't going to be able to show you a very good virtual screen in 3d space.
What's worse is that it's not even 1920x1080 - the screen is divided into two halves, one for each eye. So the visible resolution is 960x1080. But since those pixels are also stretched over an area three times wider than your normal monitor's field of view it means the pixels are huge. Half as many pixels stretched over ~10x the area.
In the end it looks like good ol' 1981-era IBM PC 320x200 CGA graphics - and if you do the math on the pixel size you'll see that's about the same angular pixel density.
With smartphone ppi pushing above 400 it will be solved in the second or third generation. It will be possible today too but you have to jack up the price threefold.
You also have to think about the latency, and if I'm not mistaken they already want 60 FPS as the default, and I know Carmack wants 120 FPS eventually, because framerate is apparently a lot more important in that kind of virtual environment, because it's more obvious when you have dropped frames. So 120 FPS is probably "ideal", but not practical yet (the screens aren't there either).
Add to that 2x or 4x (4k) the resolution, and you're going to need really powerful hardware and very fast cables. HDMI 2.0 and Thunderbolt 2.0 barely support 4k @ 60 FPS, but I suppose that's getting pretty close. There are probably other bottlenecks, though.
120Hz monitors are already standard equipment for professional PC FPS players: apparently it makes aim significantly easier. It does seem to usually take some drastically lowered settings to get anything resembling 120Hz minimum from the video card, though. Of course there's also the problem of getting 120Hz panels at the sort of DPI that Oculus needs. (The 120Hz LCDs were apparently an unintended by-product of the LCD manufacturers' drive for 60Hz 3D.) This is one area in which LCDs are still playing catch-up to CRTs, by the way.
It reduces the perceived latency, thus making aim easier. If you want to make a habit of being rude to strangers in public, you should be very, very careful to have your facts exactly right before you do it.
reducing latency doesn't make aim easier, it makes prediction easier. aiming is pointing at the right pixel at a given moment. since i figure there can be confusion, i put quotes on "aim", too.
if you were playing FPS at a high level you'd also probably make the difference between prediction and aim itself, because they're 2 different skills that you train differently.
my words were actually too exact for your sake, ironically - and not actually rude but honest.
So, now that you have been, I'll just let you know that you, sir, are just a random asshole. (note: i still have my facts exactly right)
reducing latency doesn't make aim easier, it makes prediction easier. aiming is pointing at the right pixel at a given moment. since i figure there can be confusion, i put quotes on "aim", too.
if you were playing FPS at a high level you'd also probably make the difference between prediction and aim itself, because they're 2 different skills that you train differently.
I have repeatedly heard/read high-level TF2 players describe 120Hz as improving their 'aim' - their choice of words. This applies to hitscan as well as projectile aim, and most certainly includes flick hitscan aim, where any kind of prediction is at a minimum. While we're at it, here's a Q3 professional http://www.stermy.com/shoutbox.php :
Yes, 120hz LCD are WAY better than 75hz LCDs and will improve your aim/accuracy quite alot.
On the other side, I think I've yet to see an FPS pro refer to 120Hz as improving 'prediction' as such (though no doubt it does).
At the moment, the dev kit Rift's low resolution is not quite suitable for serious text editing. Also, we are clearly going to eventually want free-floating windows instead of Deskope's side-by-side desktops. But, it's a start and moving forward the path to near-future VR desktops is pretty much clear.
I am a virtual desktop fan as well, I even prefer it to the two+ monitors approach, but just moving your head to look at any other open window seems superior. Plus maybe shake it a bit to move it to the center position, that sounds awesome to me.
To bad Rift for now is focused on Windows for now, I'd love to see a Compiz DE make use of this.
Comments
I'd like a dev environment to be made in oculus rift. Why simply limit ourselves to games (though very cool and fun)? To me it seems like the oculus allows for an entirely separate reality to be created. Imagine putting on the rift and instead of your desktop you can have a wall with 100 monitors in it? Move you editor to the side have a build above you etc...
I bought on to the Kickstarter with the express intention of doing just that.
I sold mine. In 5 years, maybe I'll try again. It needs 2-3 generations of improvement, at least, before it's suitable for development work. Currently, the resolution is so bad you can't even display legible text within the 3d world.
Well, the point behind the currently-available revision is that it's a rough model for developers to build things that will look better on the higher-def release model.
By all accounts, the HD prototype that's floating around looks really, really swell.
I have no doubt it does, for games. But due to the nature of its optics, the perceived resolution of the Rift will still not be up to snuff for a while. You're essentially looking at the screen through a magnifying glass; I'm not sure there's any display with a good-enough pixel density out there, yet.
Thanks for saying this. I've tried the developer version and while it was great fun the resolution, screen door and shimmer issues were really disappointing.
I agree that it needs a couple of generations of improvement before it becomes useful for text. And if you check the specs of the "HD" version it's not going to be sufficiently improved to make the difference.
I tried the HD prototype at Unite 2013 and it looks really really good. Just look for the video of RogueCraft and you'll see text appear just fine.
A friend told me this the other day as well. It is rather limitless... and sounds amazing to code in. You could even have great visualizations for things such as working with the different branches of code. As in the "zone" as you can get. You can change thhe scenery to whatever as well. Dark room? Done. Wonderful vista? Done.
It's not that farfetched to imagine a future where plenty of programmers sit 'jacked' in, into an Oculus Rift to code.
"It's not that farfetched to imagine a future where plenty of programmers sit 'jacked' in, into an Oculus Rift to code."
Life imitates art. Sadly, William Gibson novels may seem less beautifully strange to future generations. ;)
Though I immediately thought of the corresponding passage in Snow Crash. :)
It is a great idea, but I think the Rift will need to get a wildly better resolution. A 1920x1080 real screen isn't going to be able to show you a very good virtual screen in 3d space.
8k version would be enough according to this http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/199361/a_conversation_...
What's worse is that it's not even 1920x1080 - the screen is divided into two halves, one for each eye. So the visible resolution is 960x1080. But since those pixels are also stretched over an area three times wider than your normal monitor's field of view it means the pixels are huge. Half as many pixels stretched over ~10x the area.
In the end it looks like good ol' 1981-era IBM PC 320x200 CGA graphics - and if you do the math on the pixel size you'll see that's about the same angular pixel density.
With smartphone ppi pushing above 400 it will be solved in the second or third generation. It will be possible today too but you have to jack up the price threefold.
You also have to think about the latency, and if I'm not mistaken they already want 60 FPS as the default, and I know Carmack wants 120 FPS eventually, because framerate is apparently a lot more important in that kind of virtual environment, because it's more obvious when you have dropped frames. So 120 FPS is probably "ideal", but not practical yet (the screens aren't there either).
Add to that 2x or 4x (4k) the resolution, and you're going to need really powerful hardware and very fast cables. HDMI 2.0 and Thunderbolt 2.0 barely support 4k @ 60 FPS, but I suppose that's getting pretty close. There are probably other bottlenecks, though.
120Hz monitors are already standard equipment for professional PC FPS players: apparently it makes aim significantly easier. It does seem to usually take some drastically lowered settings to get anything resembling 120Hz minimum from the video card, though. Of course there's also the problem of getting 120Hz panels at the sort of DPI that Oculus needs. (The 120Hz LCDs were apparently an unintended by-product of the LCD manufacturers' drive for 60Hz 3D.) This is one area in which LCDs are still playing catch-up to CRTs, by the way.
it doesnt make "aim" easier. it reduces the perceived latency.
It reduces the perceived latency, thus making aim easier. If you want to make a habit of being rude to strangers in public, you should be very, very careful to have your facts exactly right before you do it.
woot, getting threats on the public HN!
reducing latency doesn't make aim easier, it makes prediction easier. aiming is pointing at the right pixel at a given moment. since i figure there can be confusion, i put quotes on "aim", too.
if you were playing FPS at a high level you'd also probably make the difference between prediction and aim itself, because they're 2 different skills that you train differently.
my words were actually too exact for your sake, ironically - and not actually rude but honest.
So, now that you have been, I'll just let you know that you, sir, are just a random asshole. (note: i still have my facts exactly right)
Excuse me? I didn't threaten you in the least.
I have repeatedly heard/read high-level TF2 players describe 120Hz as improving their 'aim' - their choice of words. This applies to hitscan as well as projectile aim, and most certainly includes flick hitscan aim, where any kind of prediction is at a minimum. While we're at it, here's a Q3 professional http://www.stermy.com/shoutbox.php :
On the other side, I think I've yet to see an FPS pro refer to 120Hz as improving 'prediction' as such (though no doubt it does).
Version 0.01 of this is available now with Deskope http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhjTNwa-6f8
At the moment, the dev kit Rift's low resolution is not quite suitable for serious text editing. Also, we are clearly going to eventually want free-floating windows instead of Deskope's side-by-side desktops. But, it's a start and moving forward the path to near-future VR desktops is pretty much clear.
Virtual desktops do that quite admirably today, though.
I've never been able to effectively use virtual desktops. I guess I tend to forget where I put windows.
With one huge virtual display I'd be able to see where things are out of the corner of my eye or with a quick glance.
I am a virtual desktop fan as well, I even prefer it to the two+ monitors approach, but just moving your head to look at any other open window seems superior. Plus maybe shake it a bit to move it to the center position, that sounds awesome to me.
To bad Rift for now is focused on Windows for now, I'd love to see a Compiz DE make use of this.
You know there are SDKs for Linux and OS X, right? It's just the 3rd party developers who are focusing on Windows, as usual with gaming.