Khronos Officially Releases OpenXR 1.0

[coder]

Not in consumer area.

Interest is kinda dying off for businness and military use as well.

Yeah, we're in the tail of the VR bubble, but you're also just here for trolling lulz.

If I'm wrong, please state your interest in OpenXR.

[mike456]

I gave up waiting for my Samsung Odyssey to work automagically with OpenXR on Ubuntu and sold it.
The main reason is, it got to hot to play longer than 20 minutes or so. Also low resolution. But I'll be back
mostly for flightsim probably with next generation headsets that have above fixed.
The immersion in Alien Isolation was huge fun.

[zboszor]

I thought fragmentation was solved long ago by DEFRAG.EXE

[mlau]

It kinda feels like VR was a fad and has already died off. Is there still the same level of interest in it?

I'm still interested, but waiting for better headsets, i.e. much higher resolution displays and wider FOV. The Vive Pro is fine, but I can see the pixels individually and the blackness
around the displays which is annoying.

[coder]

Whats great is that OpenXR and OpenHMD does away with all the consumer lies so you don't need a high range GPU. You can even run it on a Raspberry Pi (zero) (http://www.openhmd.net/index.php/showcase/vr-zero-pri/).

Lies? Uh, if you're happy with such graphics, good for you. That's not even DayDream quality.

[coder]

This is called AR, Augmented Reality. And it's an entirely different kind of animal.
The processing power required to effectively overlay something over real images requires significant processing power.

Which is why MS Hololens was doing it in 2015, with a cell phone SoC and a DSP? And Google Tango used a Tegra-based tablet, back in 2014?

I'm sure that's significant by someone's definition, but not by the standard of current, mid+ range cellphones.

It's not going anywhere.

It's definitely in a post-hype phase, but who are you to say it's not going anywhere? I mean this more than rhetorically - on what are you basing this, besides your own opinions and preconceptions?

[coder]

Yeah, I'm aware I'm interchanging VR and AR because the underlying technologies are similar enough and intertwined in a lot of the use cases I'm imagining.

He doesn't believe in VR, and nothing you say will convince him otherwise. I've been down this road with even more use cases than you listed.

He's just here to hate on VR and any of its adherents.

[starshipeleven]

you're also just here for trolling lulz.

It would be trolling if I'm wrong in what I said. Am I?

[DrYak]

This. I've ran some tests with OpenHMD on a old laptop with onboard Intel GPU, and it performed surprisingly well with the Rift.

Just a big thank for your detailed report of your experience with the tech.

[starshipeleven]

Yeah, I'm aware I'm interchanging VR and AR because the underlying technologies are similar enough and intertwined

No they aren't. The only thing they have in common is that you need a display on your head.

The main difference between the two is that VR does not need to process reality (it's called "Virtual Reality" for a reason), so it's challenges are mostly in the headset, to make it good enough to show lifelike virtual stuff, and to have good enough input devices and other tooling to make a good and immersive VR experience.

AR has to process reality, and this makes it MUCH harder than it may look. AR relies on the system having seriously advanced image recognition and/or other expensive sensors to be able to reliably add something virtual on top of reality without it glitching like Skyrim on release.

The ability to take a video feed and then take the data from drones, people, aircraft, ground vehicles all into a virtual environment at the base for commanders to use or an overlay over what can be seen is still going to be a major factor in pushing this technology forward.

The main issue with that is information overload, and this can be observed with game HUDs already. Too much shit in the HUD and you are just wasting space.

The limitation is the human user, you can aggregate all you want, but he is going to be able to focus only on a few of these at a time. We are already at near-peak capacity with a 4k screen, and you really don't want to distract people in the field with bullshit feeds, they need to look around 360° already to avoid getting shot from some random asshole. The people on the field must receive directions and commands aggregated by their support intel analysts and chain of command back at the base that together can process much more information than a single human alone.

AR is at best a visualization for this stuff, but it's not severely going to change things.

using controls to move the view around is slower than naturally moving one's head and looking around

Not really. Learn to game with increased mouse sensitivity, or look at some footage of pro gamers (in any game really).
You can't move your whole body or even head that fast, even looking at that footage can make you dizzy.

Think future forward to remote operated fighter jets operating a mach 3, pulling 15 Gs, and outperforming anything we know of that's declassified, the person operating that is going to want to be able to look and see with the minimal latency possible and a spherical camera setup and headset will provide that.

It's marginally better than a full screen all around, but as I said this is doable even now as you are just aggregating camera feeds.

Not to mention having to operate camera view controls as well as flight controls all at once.

Nani?
This is a long-solved problem with IR head tracking, and is already used in decent flight and space sim games right since at least 5 years.
You basicaly place a IR camera that tracks your face movements and use that to operate the camera view controls.
An example https://www.naturalpoint.com/trackir/ (the game in that example is one of the X-something series from Egosoft, probably "X3-Terran Conflict" or later, they mostly look the same)

For a Predator styled drone the multi-monitor setup works; for a hypothetical fighter/interceptor drone they don't make much sense at all outside of cruising to the target.

Modern air combat kind of changed after the invention of missiles. They are severely dumbed down in movies because WWII-style dogfighting is fun and fighter jocks are interesting characters, but in reality missiles killed off all the fun.

You are NOT going to evade a missile that is faster than you, has orders of magnitude lower inertia and does not even need to care about flying properly because it's moving on thrust force alone. The procedures to counter missile locks are deploy countermeasures (flares or chaff), and if they fail to eject.