Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Relativty – An open-source VR headset

relativty.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 235 posts

Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset

#31

Post by jstanley »

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…

> Even if tracking was working perfectly, this would be a cut down version of an Oculus Go

Yes, I agree, this is a tremendous achievement and a great project.

Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset

#33

Post by solarengineer »

konjin wrote: post #26
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…

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.

Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset

#34

Post by DoofusOfDeath »

jonplackett wrote: post #7

It's like Oculus redux. Give it a few months and Google/Microsoft/Amazon will probably buy it up.

If Relativity ends up with a competitive design, I agree that it's a risk. But I'd rather hear from Relativity's creators before assuming it could go the same way.

Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset

#35

Post by [deleted] »

ralusek wrote: post #5
chmod775 wrote: post #2

Sounds like you could sell this pre-assembled for $300 and it'd still blow all the other headsets out of the water. Taken at face value this sounds pretty great.

We know nothing of how performant it is. The reason ALL VR isn't at 2K 120fps isn't because other companies don't know how to do that -- most of the technological hurdle comes from the PC producing those outputs -- it's just that there are clearly performance standards companies hold themselves to in order to consider the product fit for a general audience. In regards to the room scale tracking alone: > Precision and…

[deleted]

Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset

#36

Post by taneq »

anilakar wrote: post #15
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…

Having 1440p screens would have been great two years ago. The baseline currently is Index with 1700ish vertical pixels, and competitors such as HP and Pimax have pushed past the "4K" (2160+) pixel mark. Disclaimer: I'm a sim game enthusiast and don't play any titles where the game designer can just change the gameplay mechanics and UI to work on screens with a low PPD.

Exactly. The original Rift and Vive were 1440x1440 (iirc) and the Vive Pro, Valve Index and most WMR headsets are 1440x1600.

Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset

#38

Post by noxer »

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?

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.

Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset

#39

Post by marcinzm »

chmod775 wrote: post #2

Sounds like you could sell this pre-assembled for $300 and it'd still blow all the other headsets out of the water. Taken at face value this sounds pretty great.

As others have pointed out the displays aren't 2k and they aren't 120hz and they cost almost $200 alone. So none of the marketing is true.

Re: Relativty – An open-source VR headset

#40

Post by ColeyG »

DoofusOfDeath wrote: post #28
detritus wrote: post #11

Good luck to them, and I've bookmarked it to keep tabs on it in future, but that is an infuriating and in my opinion - very poor - choice of brand name.

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?

Not the OP but I thought it was miss-spelled at first.
Post reply on HN