HTC unveils Vive Pro - Higher resolution, integrated audio, front facing cameras, etc. - Sensationalist Headlines

can't wait for this one to cost $1500 AUD

[QUOTE=Aleal;53036419]I just bought a god damn vive for christmas... I feel like headbutting a wall right now... ._.[/QUOTE] It is more demanding on your hardware, for one, so wait for the required and recommended specs before you start getting too worried.

[QUOTE=Elspin;53036426]I'm sure the gap is going to widen but as of the december steam hardware survey they're still about equal in sales.[/QUOTE] Technically it would mean the Rift is "in the lead" since there's many Rift users that are not on Steam, but only on Oculus home. Though this dickwaving contest was already done to death months ago, doesn't matter who's leading since at this point of VR adoption both headsets are good VR.

Apparently there's an HMD only upgrade option

oh my, wireless vive is what I've been waiting for. I [i]may[/i] actually buy this

[QUOTE=Foda;53036123]this is just a hardware refresh to keep up sales while HTC waits forever for Valve to do anything. not sure why there's two front-facing cameras other than "because". seems like it will just add 100+ to the base cost and they're not using those for inside-out tracking.[/QUOTE] I'd hope they finally figured out that passthrough cameras are nicer to deal with than pulling off the headset whenever someone wants to talk. Oculus even has one on the GearVR, let alone their main headsets now and in the future. Unless you're putting emphasis on the fact that there's two in which case yeah I dunno maybe they're hoping people in corporate environments start buying them for AR business applications.

[QUOTE=Orkel;53036516]Technically it would mean the Rift is "in the lead" since there's many Rift users that are not on Steam, but only on Oculus home.[/QUOTE] I'd find that kind of... odd? I'd figure the enormous majority of people into gaming on PC enough to own a high end VR headset would use steam, unless the "exclusively interested in VR for art/experiences" market is a lot bigger than I though [QUOTE]Though this dickwaving contest was already done to death months ago, doesn't matter who's leading since at this point of VR adoption both headsets are good VR.[/QUOTE] There really isn't any of that going on here? I don't see any aggressive discussion over which is better at all really, I prefer the Vive myself and I'd still say Oculus is much better positioned right now.

The Vive Pro seems kind of underwhelming. Pimax is imminently due to release a headset with comparable input resolution, but with a better field of view and upscaling to 4k per eye to reduce screen door effect. I'd be surprised if Oculus's next release isn't more than basically a resolution increase and some minor additional tech aimed at developers. Wireless is a much-needed improvement, though.

[QUOTE=Jelman;53036140]Waiting on Valve for that. So see you in 2022[/QUOTE] And that's assuming one of the Vive's competitors doesn't beat Valve to the punch. I mean, Source 2 is still a work in progress, even though it's years past the point where it could have ever been relevant.

Also is the wireless thing done with H265 video or something?

[QUOTE=halfer;53036850]Also is the wireless thing done with H265 video or something?[/QUOTE] No, it's using Intel [url=https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/wireless-products/wigig-sink-w13100.html]WiGig[/url]

[QUOTE=Lyokanthrope;53036860]No, it's using Intel [url=https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/wireless-products/wigig-sink-w13100.html]WiGig[/url][/QUOTE] H265 is a video compression method, not a transmission protocol. They're asking how they formatted the data being sent, not how they sent it.

[QUOTE=Elspin;53036871]H265 is a video compression method, not a transmission protocol. They're asking how they formatted the data being sent, not how they sent it.[/QUOTE] Yes, I mean, WiGig is fast, but it can't be "90 lossless frames at 2880x1600" fast, right?

[QUOTE=halfer;53036883]Yes, I mean, WiGig is fast, but it can't be "90 lossless frames at 2880x1600" fast, right?[/QUOTE] Wigig on their site says [URL="https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/wireless-products/wigig-sink-w13100.html"]Allows wire-equivalent quality for up to two full HD displays, low-latency human interface devices (HID), and multi-Gbps I/O for a high performance, on-desk productivity experience[/URL] so, assuming that their claim of 2 1080p streams (assuming at 60 fps) is accurate, then 2*1080*1920*(60 fps) = 248,832,000 the vive is 2880*1600*(90 fps) = 414,720,000 this is bare napkin math and I may be completely wrong, but it looks to me that they will have to use some compression here (some bandwidth seems to be put aside for other things though, perhaps they will make use of that?)

[QUOTE=da space core;53036891]this is bare napkin math and I may be completely wrong, but it looks to me that they will have to use some compression here[/QUOTE] Probably HW HEVC, which isn't a surprise. For very little trade-off you drastically reduce the bandwidth requirements.

[QUOTE=glitchvid;53036896]Probably HW HEVC, which isn't a surprise. For very little trade-off you drastically reduce the bandwidth requirements.[/QUOTE] either way, I will like to see reviews of this before considering dropping whatever price point it is at. TP-link showed that this tech is possible today, so I do have my hopes up

[QUOTE=Foda;53036411]because HTC doesn't know what it's doing. here's their stock over the last few years [img]https://riftinfo.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/vr-htc-vive-stock-2.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Looks like it hit the floor and is about too moon.

[QUOTE=kyle877;53036130]I don't understand why they'd add another front-facing camera, either. the Vive has one that I don't even use.[/QUOTE] True 3D augmented reality ala Hololens, I'd assume.

[QUOTE=Fourier;53036909]Looks like it hit the floor and is about too moon.[/QUOTE] Not unless they actually get any sort of market share again. They had the first Android phone, and 2011 was great for them because they were the best selling manufacturer of Android and Windows phones. They lost almost the entirety of that over the years, and they aren't doing anything with Google anymore.

[QUOTE=Elspin;53036871]H265 is a video compression method, not a transmission protocol. They're asking how they formatted the data being sent, not how they sent it.[/QUOTE] I guess I should've typed more. I get the difference, but with the amount of bandwidth you'd have over WiGIG it's very unlikely they're using something like H265. It's likely something similar to DisplayLink.

[QUOTE=The freeman;53036997]Not unless they actually get any sort of market share again. They had the first Android phone, and 2011 was great for them because they were the best selling manufacturer of Android and Windows phones. They lost almost the entirety of that over the years, and they aren't doing anything with Google anymore.[/QUOTE] You are right, that is the risk that HTC will do nothing interesting or profitable. But buying here is still low-risk since it's on floor and you know HTC is not dead & and VR (what HTC is doing) might explode in future. Their android phones were great though, I don't know why they lost market share.

If they drop those horrible pentile pixels, they'll have a heap less screen door effect.

wonder if this will make my eventual purchase of a Rift next year even cheaper?

[QUOTE=Foda;53036169]that's seems like a rather poor decision considering there's no ARKit or ARCore like libraries available natively for Windows, OSX, or Linux.[/QUOTE] [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Mixed_Reality"]Windows Mixed Reality platform[/URL]

[QUOTE=Fourier;53037219]You are right, that is the risk that HTC will do nothing interesting or profitable. But buying here is still low-risk since it's on floor and you know HTC is not dead & and VR (what HTC is doing) might explode in future. Their android phones were great though, I don't know why they lost market share.[/QUOTE] Because Samsung, most likely.

[QUOTE=Foda;53036123]not sure why there's two front-facing cameras other than "because". seems like it will just add 100+ to the base cost and they're not using those for inside-out tracking.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=kyle877;53036130]I don't understand why they'd add another front-facing camera, either. the Vive has one that I don't even use.[/QUOTE] This is actually the feature I'm most excited about as a developer. The Vive's current camera is [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1gBCSXKaUk&t=2s"]something I've used for gameplay recording[/URL]. But having two cameras opens up so many new possibilities for AR that I've wanted to try. AR is not really possible with the Vive's current single camera (maybe possible but it would look and feel awful). Also, currently the chaperone can be set to use the camera to show what's around you, but it looks and feels so weird with a single camera projecting a 2D image around you. This will make it 3D and completely natural.

Can't you also use dual front cameras to do room space tracking without needing lighthouse trackers? I feel like hearing about another headset that was using that technology

[QUOTE=LZTYBRN;53037962]Can't you also use dual front cameras to do room space tracking without needing lighthouse trackers? I feel like hearing about another headset that was using that technology[/QUOTE] TBH that's one of the slowest and inefficient methods of tracking there is. Lighthouses are basically the perfect solution for modern VR.

[QUOTE=LZTYBRN;53037962]Can't you also use dual front cameras to do room space tracking without needing lighthouse trackers? I feel like hearing about another headset that was using that technology[/QUOTE] Microsoft managed to pull a decent job with their headset using this method, but at their low price point, "decent" is enough. At the price point of the vive, it better be practically perfect, hence the lighthouse system

Tracking the headset with the cameras sounds like a great idea until you realize you can't track the controllers outside their limited field of view, which I'm guessing would get annoying real fast