What's the Linux story around Quest these days? I want to buy a VR headset but Linux compat is a must. Any recommendations?
Meta Quest 3
171–180 of 342 posts
Re: Meta Quest 3
#172This seems like on paper it is quite close to the Apple Vision Pro. The performance per watt of the chips is probably not far off and both devices deal with the same basic design constraints of needing to fit comfortably on your head. The main difference seems to be the micro OLED and eye tracking on the Vision Pro vs. the Quest’s inclusion of controllers. I’ll be curious how these two devices stack up to each other…
> quite close
The difference in PPD is pretty significant when it comes to both actual mixed reality use around other people (assuming people can get over the dork factor in general) and anything at all related to virtual screens (whether productivity or just 'personal theater' usage).
Re: Meta Quest 3
#173So what’s the killer app? Beatsaber and some other games can be a lot of fun, but they’re not new. What new experience are ready for this? I get the quality is better, and that’s not nothing. But other than that this largely seems like more of the same. VR still doesn’t seem to have advanced much in software to me. And Meta keeps pushing virtual meetings and such but that’s not my cup of tea. I owned a Quest 2 and ha…
Similar to the vision pro the killer app will eventually be AR. Its pretty obvious that virtual TV/Computer screens at arbitrary sizes/distances in arbitrary environments will simply be a better UX than physical monitors. Not sure if Quest 3 is there yet, but they're iterating towards it.
> It’s pretty obvious that virtual TV/Computer screens at arbitrary sizes/distances in arbitrary environments will simply be a better UX than physical monitors.
Is it? I don’t feel like it’s better right now (I know some people do, but I’m not convinced they’re the majority). Fixing the issues with VR is not trivial. There’s some deep flaws in the optics that we simply don’t know how to solve yet, and the weight needs to go down by a lot. I’m not sure I’d ever be comfortable wearing them more than a couple of hours when they’re entirely closed… but that’s a hard requirement for a good experience. There’s a bunch of hard contradictions in making good VR/AR.
Remember that as VR technology improves, so will monitors.
Re: Meta Quest 3
#174No one is making good software for these things. And Meta’s desire to have their own walled garden is reducing the strength of their products.
Re: Meta Quest 3
#175Re: Meta Quest 3
#176What's the Linux story around Quest these days? I want to buy a VR headset but Linux compat is a must. Any recommendations?
It’s a standalone device, so I’m not sure I understand the question.
Re: Meta Quest 3
#177Re: Meta Quest 3
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which won't release applications for the quest?
What if they can’t? What if whatever it is that makes the app so compelling automatically rules it out on the Quest 3 for some reason? What if it demands a better input method or higher resolution?
Then I'd be impressed, frankly. I've got the original Quest, and features you'd expect to be broken or missing (eg. hand tracking, multitasking, game streaming, web browsing, sideloading, et. al) all work fine.
It's honestly quite sad that the core line of rhetoric here is a laconic "what if" statement around theoretical apps. The Quest exists and has sold tens of millions of units; the Vision Pro has yet to prove itself. Unless you have a specific example, this can only be interpreted as wishcasting.
Re: Meta Quest 3
#179So what’s the killer app? Beatsaber and some other games can be a lot of fun, but they’re not new. What new experience are ready for this? I get the quality is better, and that’s not nothing. But other than that this largely seems like more of the same. VR still doesn’t seem to have advanced much in software to me. And Meta keeps pushing virtual meetings and such but that’s not my cup of tea. I owned a Quest 2 and ha…
Similar to the vision pro the killer app will eventually be AR. Its pretty obvious that virtual TV/Computer screens at arbitrary sizes/distances in arbitrary environments will simply be a better UX than physical monitors. Not sure if Quest 3 is there yet, but they're iterating towards it.
Is that pretty obvious? Better in what contexts?
I've seen someone here say that they really liked working with a virtual display from wherever, but the resolution of their whole display was 1080p. As someone who regularly uses dual 4k external monitors plus my laptop, I didn't understand how they could be productive. E.g. I may want to keep a browser with docs and a jupyter notebook of a particular investigation on my left, and an IDE of my repo on my right, plus chat with the colleague I'm working with below on my laptop, and all showing a lot of text or perhaps detailed graphs. If 8k monitors cross my affordability threshold before XR headsets with 4k (per eye) cross my affordability threshold, I would likely switch to more physical-screen pixels than to cut down to just 4k pixels strapped to my face.
Re: Meta Quest 3
#180So what’s the killer app? Beatsaber and some other games can be a lot of fun, but they’re not new. What new experience are ready for this? I get the quality is better, and that’s not nothing. But other than that this largely seems like more of the same. VR still doesn’t seem to have advanced much in software to me. And Meta keeps pushing virtual meetings and such but that’s not my cup of tea. I owned a Quest 2 and ha…
When Valve releases a stand-alone headset that can play regular PC VR games that will be what changes the VR market. Until then it'll be just, "more of the same." Minor improvements/evolution, etc.
Biggest thing the industry could do in order to move VR/AR forwards would be to adopt SteamOS or a similar "normal" Linux OS and give end users root. That would really be a kick in the ass towards real innovation more than, "slightly better tracking; slightly lighter; now with color pass through!"