OS X + Linux "on hold"

[mindabuse]

From the Oculus Blog post https://www.oculus.com/blog/powering-the-rift/

Our development for OS X and Linux has been paused in order to focus on delivering a high quality consumer-level VR experience at launch across hardware, software, and content on Windows. We want to get back to development for OS X and Linux but we don’t have a timeline.

This might be the ideal spot to dump some thoughts which might come off a little rant-y.

Oculus, you may want to consider renaming the SDK "Oculus Windows SDK 0.6.0.0" so people have a clearer understanding.

I get it. Oculus needs to pare down to focus on "the majority".

The DK2 was announced as supporting OS X and Linux —  and people developing on those platforms waited for the SDK to catch up (weeks or months after their kits were paid for and arrived).

Today, SDK v0.6.0 is released and with no prior warning OS X and Linux are put on indefinite hold.

I bought a DK2 and can no longer develop because my platform has been deprecated. Windows and Galaxy mobile phones appear to be all they're interested in supporting. If the consumer product ships in 2016, how long will it take for the bugs to be ironed out to a point where they devote resources to non-Windows platforms?

I understand that I am in the minority, but it's still a shitty series of events. I had hopes to continue adding VR support to open source projects — especially when the SDK smoothed out. But not under these circumstances which lock me out. I bought something with the intention of developing on a non-Windows platform and am stuck in time (March 26, 2015) with an out-of-date, eventually unsupported runtime + SDK — with its own issues that I don't care to debug or work around (ghosting/smearing, lack of "direct-to-rift", etc.). And then when the consumer unit ships, I am still left out in the cold until who-knows-when?

The bottom line is this: Oculus is targeting a specific spec for current-generation hardware - and only one operating system - which could hinder a vast catalog of open source projects that can benefit from integrating multi-platform VR. Someone doesn't think OS X or Linux users have the current generation of hardware to enjoy some "ideal" current generations games? You've just doomed them from experiencing older titles that could be revived (no pun intended) with VR support that run perfectly fine on hardware that doesn't meet your specifications.

I feel like Oculus is trying to turn their product in to a platform a bit prematurely. What is the rift? A display and an input tracking device. There's no GPU or CPU. Still feels a bit over-reaching to me (even though Oculus also happens to have a content team).

Unfortunate.

[haagch]

"Baka_Rakuda" wrote:
Is this the kind of support $2,000,000,000 buys? Wasn't a major reason that Oculus let Facebook buy them instead of a company like Apple or Microsoft, so that Oculus could bring VR to the world, instead of just for those platforms holders singular purposes?

In Palmer Luckey's words:

We started Oculus VR with the vision of making virtual reality affordable and accessible, to allow everyone to experience the impossible.

As I learned more about the company and its vision and spoke with Mark, the partnership not only made sense, but became the clear and obvious path to delivering virtual reality to everyone. Facebook was founded with the vision of making the world a more connected place.

Facebook is run in an open way that’s aligned with Oculus’ culture. Over the last decade, Mark and Facebook have been champions of open software and hardware, pushing the envelope of innovation for the entire tech industry. As Facebook has grown, they’ve continued to invest in efforts like with the Open Compute Project, their initiative that aims to drive innovation and reduce the cost of computing infrastructure across the industry. This is a team that’s used to making bold bets on the future.

The partnership accelerates our vision, allows us to execute on some of our most creative ideas and take risks that were otherwise impossible. Most importantly, it means a better Oculus Rift with fewer compromises even faster than we anticipated.

We don't have to compromise on anything, and can afford to make decisions that are right for the future of virtual reality, not our current revenue.

It is definitely true. Facebook has a good track record on open hardware and software, which is great for us. We want to make our hardware and software even more open than they already are, and they are totally cool with that.

We promise we won't change. If anything, our hardware and software will get even more open, and Facebook is onboard with that.

All from https://reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/21 ... ure_of_vr/

[Robert]

The current hype around VR is fueling expectations that it could help the weakened PC and console market to recover. Microsoft being a key player in both markets has a natural interest to increase its market share. With DX12 Microsoft is well positioned to choose Oculus as a VR launch partner and perhaps convince them to commit 100% to their platform. In return Oculus might get DX12 and Windows driver performance changed in any way that helps drive VR. "Pausing" Linux and OSX support makes the community rightfully angry, but both platforms currently don't push great game sales. Valve (Linux) and Sony (BSD) don't need Oculus, because they developed their own headsets. And finally Apple has the resources to develop their own headset. I also wouldn't expect Apple to partner with Oculus on the OSX side of things since Oculus is partnering with Samsung on Mobil VR solutions already. Makes all sense to me, if I like it or not.

[haagch]

"Robert" wrote:
but both platforms currently don't push great game sales.

The cause is probably that many games aren't sold there. Are we wondering why people play Project CARS and The Witcher 3 on Windows instead of waiting for who knows how long until they can play it on linux?

But stop arguing with "sales". This is a direct quote from Palmer himself:

We don't have to compromise on anything, and can afford to make decisions that are right for the future of virtual reality, not our current revenue.

Ergo: Oculus thinks making a proprietary windows-only ecosystem is right for the future of virtual reality instead of investing into a cross platform ecosystem based on vulkan.