Relativty – An open-source VR headset • Hacker News Board

Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset

#61

Post by noxer » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 1:19 PM UTC

Mirioron wrote: post #52

amarshall wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn’t really help, as while typically it’s assumed the aspect ratio is 16:9, that’s not always true, making such a scheme ambiguous. Listing vertical resolution with aspect ratio is fairly sane, though. Or use standardized specific resolutions (e.g. FHD, QHD, 4K UHD).

These specifications don't mean anything for a lot of people. To me they sound like marketing buzzwords that companies use to try to sell me inferior products. I'd much rather have them say 2k than any of the "FHD" abbreviations.

It's exactly the opposite. Whenever you see 2K you have to check what they actually mean with that. I can be ~2000xAnything or they can blatantly lie and name 1440x1440 2K. FHD however is defined its exactly 1920x1080 and nothing else.

Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset

#62

Post by LegitShady » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 1:20 PM UTC

nl wrote: post #57

utopcell wrote: post #13

This might be a fun weekend project to work on, but cannot be built for $200. The displays alone (and their driver PCB that accepts DisplayPort) cost $195. They are also not 2K but rather 1440x1440 (or 2.0736M pixels). Maybe the displays were cheaper when they built this. They also hookup a 6-axis tracking chip (MPU-6050) to an Arduino board and feed it to a PC via usb. Even if tracking was working perfectly, this wo…

I think the (repeated) note that you can downscale to 1080p displays is how you are supposed to do it under $200. They note themselves these displays are $150-$190 so it's not like they are hiding something.

Just buy a used vive for that.

Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset

#63

Post by LegitShady » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 1:21 PM UTC

GodofGrunts wrote: post #24

noxer wrote: post #10

Daily reminder: 2K doesn't really exist. Yes by definition anything with around 2000 pixels vertical would be 2K but that would mean FHD is 2K because it almost 2000 pixels wide. The display in question here is 1440x1440 That is not 2K. Sure there are two next to each other that would mean 2880 pixels horizontal but the image you see cant have this resolution. Also that would be 3K not 2K. So pls everyone stop the no…

Can we just go back to calling resolutions by their height?

My main monitor is 5120x1440. Is it 1440p?

Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset

#64

Post by dandellion » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 1:22 PM UTC

GodofGrunts wrote: post #24

noxer wrote: post #10

Daily reminder: 2K doesn't really exist. Yes by definition anything with around 2000 pixels vertical would be 2K but that would mean FHD is 2K because it almost 2000 pixels wide. The display in question here is 1440x1440 That is not 2K. Sure there are two next to each other that would mean 2880 pixels horizontal but the image you see cant have this resolution. Also that would be 3K not 2K. So pls everyone stop the no…

Can we just go back to calling resolutions by their height?

I've always wondered why we can't just use the pixel count.

Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset

#65

Post by GuB-42 » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 1:23 PM UTC

GodofGrunts wrote: post #24

noxer wrote: post #10

Daily reminder: 2K doesn't really exist. Yes by definition anything with around 2000 pixels vertical would be 2K but that would mean FHD is 2K because it almost 2000 pixels wide. The display in question here is 1440x1440 That is not 2K. Sure there are two next to each other that would mean 2880 pixels horizontal but the image you see cant have this resolution. Also that would be 3K not 2K. So pls everyone stop the no…

Can we just go back to calling resolutions by their height?

There was a brief period of sanity in the late 90s early 2000s where resolution used actual numbers (ex: 1024x768)

Otherwise it is a mess. There is the letter soup (WSXGA+, WQUXGA,... ), the lines (1080p, 720i,... a throwback to analog CRTs), the HD (Full HD, HD ready, ultra HD,...), the K (4K, 8K,...)...

Is it that hard to use 2 numbers?

Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset

#66

Post by noxer » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 1:27 PM UTC

psadauskas wrote: post #44

noxer wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was never a thing so we can't go back to it. A resolution is 2 dimensional height + aspect ratio works. But for all the popular resolutions we have a standardized short form like FHD/QHD/XGA/VGA but these obviously cant cover every existing resolution. Like for example the one from the article 1440p 1:1 there is no standardized name for it.

When widescreen LCDs were starting to replace 4:3 LCDs and CRTs, the screens were described as 720p, 1080i, etc. It wasn't until 4k was a thing that screens were described by their width instead of height.

i stands for "interlaced" that has nothing to do with display resolution. p stands for "progressive scan" technically also not related to resolution but it makes clear that the number before describes the vertical resolution.

Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset

#67

Post by gegtik » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 1:28 PM UTC

solarengineer wrote: post #33

konjin wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great, is the oculus go open source?

Not a valid retort, IMO, to a comment that was only making an observation on the prices of the parts.

Counterpoint: the comment was not only making an observation on the prices of the parts.

Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset

#68

Post by nl » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 1:28 PM UTC

LegitShady wrote: post #62

nl wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the (repeated) note that you can downscale to 1080p displays is how you are supposed to do it under $200. They note themselves these displays are $150-$190 so it's not like they are hiding something.

Just buy a used vive for that.

No one is claiming that you can't get something cheaper, either.

Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset

#69

Post by gegtik » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 1:29 PM UTC

alecfreud wrote: post #58

DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that "relativity" isn't a great name: it's a mouthful at 5 syllables, and I don't see a logical connection between the name and the product. But I don't understand why the name would be infuriating. Can you explain?

The name is "Relativty" without the last 'i' That's the issue. It's an awkward 4 syllables.

"Relative-T"?

Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset

#70

Post by noxer » Thu, Sep 10, 2020, 1:34 PM UTC

LegitShady wrote: post #63

GodofGrunts wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we just go back to calling resolutions by their height?

My main monitor is 5120x1440. Is it 1440p?

Yes, but without aspect ratio you don't give all information. It's also 5K but again missing aspect ratio so best is to name the pixels.