cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Quest and Oculus Link - PC VR is already wireless - why waste development?

tateconcepts
Protege
So I've had the Quest now since Xmas and I've bought a few games, my kids liked it maybe more-so than the first Rift. I keep seeing all this development jazz about Oculus Link and its never been very good. First, I understand that Oculus (Aka Facebook) wants to ensure the product has synergy with the previous development efforts and investments. However, it's probably best that after all these development releases - beta stops appearing in the solution and these agile development teams  actually do something productive besides address people's frame rates that shouldn't be complaining about an app in beta in the first place. I get that you have a ton of Nvidia fans (I like their Jetson Nano too and I had 4xGTX1070 last year). But if I have that kinda cash, why would I want the inexpensive Oculus Quest? 

Nvidia is an overpriced beast that anyone whom mined crypto knows, it served well with certain algorithms however AMD was always the more sensible choice. Let's face it, you have a wireless solution and Facebook is attempting to mangle it with wired connectivity to address "the experience" against wireless solutions. 

May I give you some feedback?

 You Oculus Link frankly sucks against future competition entirely for this reason. The cable bothers me with the weight of the unit and if I wanted it wired, I would have invested in the Rift. I realize I'm not your typical user on here however I'm sure you have some devs with similar experiences and insight. Just stop this nonsense and open it back up with wireless functionality. I can attest and I personally found the decision to not use AMD ReLive VR was an unwise one, perhaps just delayed to ensure people purchased Oculus content. Do you want us to keep purchasing Oculus content or should we just wait for your competition to make this right?

 It is possible to have a fully VR capable Oculus Quest, totally wireless. It will not work for all your customers today but it can - if you set those expectations up front and offer the wired version for the others whom lack the investment but wish to dabble in such. I have an Intel Hades Canyon NUC (bought just for the Quest), I also installed the latest version of Windows. What is unique that people do not realize Oculus did invest in - WiFi 6 is supported on the hardware. I leveraged this using Cisco Meraki MR access points and it was meh, but after moving to their newer 802.11ac solutions (looking forward to 5G and ax wireless) and then installing AMD ReLive VR - it just worked!

 Perhaps I am missing why Facebook would invest so much development, time and customer frustration with something that has already been done and done better?
 
 For those that are reading this - don't wait - make it happen with or without Facebook. Get an AMD VR ready PC, get a wireless AC device, learn "traffic prioritization" and log that data (I use Splunk ES but Greylog or Elastic will also work). You'll also need to have business or enterprise features on your networking equipment however you will no longer be constrained to "I can't install Google Earth VR because of processing, encoding and so on"...  The way I see it, Apple lost the jailbreaking fight and Oculus will too if they don't add basic features that take this out of the "gamer" world and into the practical world.

#nolimits

Anyone else want to see wireless support for Google Earth natively? 

Has anyone had any great business uses or deployed MDM to manage them remotely?
6 REPLIES 6

Anonymous
Not applicable
Not sure I understand everything you are saying but think I agree with the overall direction. Tethering a standalone headset just seems stupid. If it was the only way to get the performance then sure, but it isn't. I just got my Quest, well just scraped in before they shut shop. I got PSVR last year and while I totally loved the VR experience I was so disappointed with the obvious censorship, abuse of customers rights and even developers that I had to find a way to gain some liberty. Never had a gaming console before, was never into gaming, VR changed that for me. Thought the Quest might give me more options as I can't afford the greater outlay of a full gaming system and headset at the moment. But apparently they want to play stupid abusive games as well? Not as bad as PS yet but they seem to want to head down that path? I think they have done an amazing job getting the performance they have out of the machine, it's a great idea and they have done it well. Why they would now sabotage it beggars belief? But if they don't quit with the exploitive crap people will go elsewhere. It is the very reason I even came here.

nalex66
MVP
MVP
It's all about options. Quest is a great way to have wireless freedom with an all-in-one headset. Link gives the option to use Quest along with a gaming PC to get the full PCVR experience without buying a second headset, for those who have a gaming PC. The next logical step is to make Link wireless, for the best of both worlds. This can already be done with Virtual Desktop, and Oculus may have something similar in the works (perhaps with a hardware solution to bypass the dependence on the quality of the user's home wifi setup).

DK2, CV1, Go, Quest, Quest 2, Quest 3.


Try my game: Cyclops Island Demo

Umpa_PC
Rising Star
For me, because you don't  need to buy 'O's cable, Quest Link is essentially a free upgrade (if you already have a USB3 cable) and I find it to work quite well, even on a system that does not meet the recommended spec.  I have tried the Virtual Desktop solution, and that costs about £15, and whilst it does work it is not as good as the link cabe.

I think the future is a PCVR Wireless solution (but not over wifi), but at the moment the Quest seems to be 'O's flagship product and the are still developing it - which is good.  Oculus is just one of many companies offering a VR solution, how about moaning at them for NOT making a wireless stand alone HMD ?
Oculus Rift S - Oculus Quest 128GB
MSI trident 3 7RB-200UK Intel Core i5-7400 3 Ghz x2
MSI GTX 1050 Ti (4GB) & MSI Aero GTX 1060 OC (6GB) & MSI Aero GTX 1070 OC 8GB
16 GB RAM x2, 1TB HDD x2, 1TB SSD x2
Windows 10 Home Edition Version 10.0.18363 Build 18363, Oculus version 17, Quest Version 17
Fan Cooling by Zotac FireStorm - AfterBurner cause me problems.

Anonymous
Not applicable
Yes as it is now the Quest is great at doubling as both a stand alone and a PC-VR headset.
It was certainly not a waste of resources as adding the Link capability to Quest has really created  a surge in sales for them which is great for the industry.

Wireless undoubtedly will come with time.

Anonymous
Not applicable
Because wireless PCVR still requires a PC, which means a way bigger investment than standalone VR.
Because wireless VR is not "already there", it has terrible visual artifacts and latency because it's streaming, which is not the case of standalone VR.
Because a closed environment is way easier to develop than an open one: much less development hazards (for example, a Windows 10 update can cause terrible performance issues).
Because not trying things is how you end up doing nothing. With that kind of reasoning, we'd still live in caves and shit on the ground.

Quest and Link are definitely not wastes. People don't realize how terrible it is to develop something for the PC ecosystem. So many uncontrollable variables. For example, you stated that Oculus Link sucks. The fact is, it does suck for many people, but it also works brillantly for many others (just like every PC VR headsets, btw), because the PC configuration will have an impact on how good the device works. There's not this issue with standalone VR.

kdon0121
Honored Guest
A proprietary and tested solution by oculus would be graet as well, so that we can see how far they can push their device. I personally think we need some kind of high speed usb dongle which connects directly to the quest to transfer the image and tracking.