Rumors/News?? about DevKit2 only in 2014

[remosito]

http://www.roadtovr.com/2013/08/20/ocul ... ev-kit-dk2

if true and DK2 only way into 2014 shortly before Consumer Version then I am REALLY triply glad Laseredge just got
HD Hdmi-Mipi board working and Sixense is doing the STEM Kickstarter.
HD and positional tracking are minimum requirements for me.

No way I gonna wait that long! Was hoping for a late 2013 release.
If this pans out true and confirmed.
Time for either a DIY HMD or A Frankenrift.


Edit: Just realized this might be read as negative or critical of Oculus.
It isn't. I have no expectations towards Oculus to schedule their
product according to my preferences at all. It's their babies

[Kamus]

They have said "no" numerous times. It's not going to happen.

Here you go, this is from a new update in roadtovr.com:

"One thing I did ask them however was whether the HD Prototype would evolve into a ‘DK2′ and was told plainly that it wasn’t on the cards or even economically viable. We’ll have to wait for the consumer version to experience the gloriousness of HD VR in our homes I’m afraid folks."

[remosito]

They have said "no" numerous times. It's not going to happen.

Here you go, this is from a new update in roadtovr.com:

"One thing I did ask them however was whether the HD Prototype would evolve into a ‘DK2′ and was told plainly that it wasn’t on the cards or even economically viable. We’ll have to wait for the consumer version to experience the gloriousness of HD VR in our homes I’m afraid folks."

Yeah, just saw that too and came to post it here...

http://www.roadtovr.com/2013/08/21/game ... erith-7584

Really hope new STEM specs are really good. DIY or Frankenrift it is then I guess for me!

[colocolo]

I've read somewhere that the Rift will have a custom low persistance 2560x1600 OLED panel....

[shiva]

Palmer said in the gamescon interview that the commercial rift is to be expected "in months, not years"
So if this engagement is respected, that means we would get it somewhere before august 2014, not late 2014, which is pretty awesome

[colocolo]

Palmer said in the gamescon interview that the commercial rift is to be expected "in months, not years"
So if this engagement is respected, that means we would get it somewhere before august 2014, not late 2014, which is pretty awesome

i think you are right. they made that very clear.

[whelanweb]

I wouldn't even mind if a DK2 came out just after Christmas and im only receiving my own DK1 tomorrow ( Note: Had a 3 hour demo with DK1 a few weeks back ) . When you think of the hours of enjoyment you'll get with the current version for the small price of 300 dollars and what people used to pay in the past for headsets of much lower quality I find it crazy that people feel the need to give out about a second development kit.

Think of it this way

APPLE bring out a new Iphone every year costing about 500 - 600 dollars with no real improvements yet people gobble them up. Oculus have given us ( the consumer ) and developers the chance to view the future and be part of video game history. They could have easily just gone the route of only supplying verified Developers and shown up at games conventions to generate buzz. They have taken the bold step of semi releasing this to the public ( Us ) and Indie developers and at all times they have stated ( Developer KIT, This is going to improve )

In every interview I've seen from Oculus ( and I've seen almost all of them ) they point out the current flaws and tell us they are on the way to fixing them. Please for the love of god stop the pissing and moaning about DK2 when its here its here and the sooner the better in my opinion.

For anybody on the fence. The DK1 is well worth 300 dollars no matter how you look at it. I can also see in the future that this kit could well become a collectors item as likely their will be less then 80k of them built.

DK1 = $300
Demos + Most games = Free
Look on my kids face as they go on the Rift Coaster = Priceless

[przecinek]

Palmer said in the gamescon interview that the commercial rift is to be expected "in months, not years"
So if this engagement is respected, that means we would get it somewhere before august 2014, not late 2014, which is pretty awesome

Yes but on Gamecon Palmer clarified that the release date "will not be measured in multiplies of years"

[shiva]

Yeah so? How is that different from saying "its coming in less than a year"?

[J. h4t3d]

Yeah so? How is that different from saying "its coming in less than a year"?

Less than a year = 11.99 months
Not in multiplies of years = 1.99 years

My bet is Holiday 2014, more than a year from now.

[colocolo]

Yeah so? How is that different from saying "its coming in less than a year"?

Less than a year = 11.99 months
Not in multiplies of years = 1.99 years

My bet is Holiday 2014, more than a year from now.

I think they were clearly meaning positive integers Z ={1,2,3,4......n}.
All you guys, dont be so pessimistic, Oculus VR isnt Sony or Microsoft.
It was founded by a 19 year old guy with the only intent to play video games in VR.

[shiva]

Yup, I dont understand all the negativity, hes obviously talking about positive integers...
Also this guy delivered 20 THOUSANDS devkits in one year with only one kickstarter's fundings
Now he has 16 *millions* in private investments and a team that includes JOHN f*cking CARMACK
How anyone can doubt that the revolution is happening in very short terms is beyond me

[colocolo]

here is a video from Gamescom with Nate Mitchell repeating the third time that it will be months.
the video is spoken half german half english.
http://www.gameswelt.de/oculus-rift/vid ... ion,204543

[Inscothen]

Here's the video were they say months not years for the commercial version, then clarify "the release date will not be measured in multiples of years from now" like others have said. I take that to mean less two years from now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7yz2mUsb31U
somewhere around 12:45

[shiva]

Well i guess some people *really* want to see the glass half empty
To me theyre first saying its coming in months, not years, then palmer attempts to confirm this by talking about no multipliers, meaning "its not coming in 3x years, not in 2x years, its 1 year at the most"
Hes making a public announcement about a delivery date for the most expected piece of hardware in gaming history, you really think hes gonna choose such a nerdy way of doing that as saying "its coming in 1.99x years, because 1.99 is not a multiplier"?
And again, genius designer, 16 millions, john carmack.

[colocolo]

Now, if we assume that they are meaning 2-11 months, not 2-23 months and we consider that this was already confirmed in June at the Machinima livestream then it could be already May 2014.
Or they mean it the other way, 13-23 months. So , July 2014 - May 2015 (what i find hard to believe because their very first statement was late 2014, and following statements are usually clarifications of the previous statement, if they do not say otherwise).
To take it literally, either 'September 2013 - May 2014' or 'July 2014 - December 2014'.
Now let us see if we can find hints in the following interviews and if we can interpretate them right to cut down the choice by half.

[Kamus]

I've read somewhere that the Rift will have a custom low persistance 2560x1600 OLED panel....

I think i know where you read it:

On your bed, while sleeping

That'd be very nice, but i just don't see this happening.
I don't think any company outside of Samsung is capable of doing this. And historically these guys have never sold what they consider to be their top screens to anyone else. They just use them for themselves.

By the time the rift releases it would certainly be possible to drive a 2560x1600 at 120 FPS with a single cable. The newest version of display port is already capable of doing 4k at 60 fps, and HDMI 2 will probably be available well before the consumer version ships.

Now i'm going to try to be realistic:

- Oculus relies 100% on smartphone screen availability and price at the moment. So a custom screen is a no-go.
- All of the high res screens out for phones now are IPS (for good reason when it comes to phones) which would mean 120hz is a no-go either.
- A 2560x1440 LCD screen is a very real possibility. Because we now know that LG is capable of mass producing one, and probably will. And lets not forget this is supposedly the brand on the 1080p prototypes... (just speculating here)
- A 1080p OLED screen should also be a possibility by the time the rift is ready to ship. Other OLED manufacturers seem to be about a year behind Samsung in resolution, so by then Samsung competitors will probably be able to do 1080p.


I don't think a custom made screen is possible unless you make a gigantic order (millions of screens). But i could be wrong about that also.

[Inscothen]

Just because they want to release the consumer version in months and not years doesn't mean they will. When I put in my kickstart, I thought it'd be amazing if they could get it out in December but realistically it'll probably be late spring or early summer. They ended up with a slightly worse screen(pixels-per-degree wise) but met my shipping expectations.

I expect a devkit2 in late spring through late summer(if they are releasing one to everyone and not just select people) and the consumer for fall of 2014 if everything goes perfect. If it doesn't go perfect, we may see a spring 2015 consumer launch or possibly release a lesser version than they wanted to but on time.

Even with millions of dollars backing them, they still need to find their screen, get their electronics designed, guarantee source for parts in quantity, add any improvements to the design, refine the design, add more to the SDK, setup the factory for the new model and increased production capability, talk to retailers if they're going that route, do test runs, test those off the line, work out bugs, fire up production, ship all these headsets by boat, stockpile a decent amount of headsets(20,000-100,000) for launch, hope there's no patent lawsuits, no regulatory redtape, setup distribution centers worldwide(if they aren't going to brick and mortar), have games ready and showcase them, process and ship thousands if not millions of headsets.

If demand is higher than expected then most people will probably not see one in their hands till summer 2015 if launched in 2014.

Kamus- LG is getting into the mobile OLED game so it's somewhat possible we may see OLED.

[mr.uu]

I think there is a huge influence of the available software on the release date, and whether we see the consumer version mid next year or end of the year will very much depend on the avaiable quality AAA experiences.
Hardware wise i am pretty certain that oculus could release a consumer version already mid next year.
But the BIG question is, what software(experiences) they bundle with it and is available. This will decide if they will succeed, not if its an HD, 1440p or even an 4K panel.

Personally i would like them to split the rift in a consumer and a pro version. The consumer one could stay within their 300$ limit and fov of the devkit. The pro version could cost 500$, with two displays(or better ppi and better optics) and wider fov, cameras for AR, etc...

Yummy!

[colocolo]

Just because they want to release the consumer version in months and not years doesn't mean they will.

You are of course right. Anything could happen.
But somehow its a bit strange how confident they are talking about their 'month release date'.
It seems that they already have a very thought-out plan.
Its not like before as they said that they dont know when/ we have to work out a lot of things (positional tracking,...). very vague.
It looks almost as they are ready to go but are waiting for a better display and more games to be ready.
I have noticed a very optimistic and happy behaviour at the Oculus staff. Very suspicious.....

[Inscothen]

There's also the possibility that they have almost everything they need design wise and just have to get enough parts(or maybe wait till parts are less expensive), produce and build up a stock. They could be waiting on games and building up demand. Maybe that's why they're so confident.

[Kamus]

Personally i would like them to split the rift in a consumer and a pro version. The consumer one could stay within their 300$ limit and fov of the devkit. The pro version could cost 500$, with two displays(or better ppi and better optics) and wider fov, cameras for AR, etc...

Yummy!

If they were somehow able to get their hands on a "better ppi" screen like you say. You can be certain they would make sure it would be on a standard version, not a "pro" one.

Some people seem to be under the impression that more pixels means higher cost. This is not the case. As time goes on, price goes down, performance goes up. This is why companies like Apple could release an iPad 3 at the same cost of the iPad 2 at the same price, but with 4x the pixel density.

[colocolo]

Personally i would like them to split the rift in a consumer and a pro version. The consumer one could stay within their 300$ limit and fov of the devkit. The pro version could cost 500$, with two displays(or better ppi and better optics) and wider fov, cameras for AR, etc...

Yummy!

If they were somehow able to get their hands on a "better ppi" screen like you say. You can be certain they would make sure it would be on a standard version, not a "pro" one.

Some people seem to be under the impression that more pixels means higher cost. This is not the case. As time goes on, price goes down, performance goes up. This is why companies like Apple could release an iPad 3 at the same cost of the iPad 2 at the same price, but with 4x the pixel density.

you are right, it behaves similar as with computer chips.
Palmer should postulate a new law for VR suitable displays: Luckey's Law.

[mr.uu]

Personally i would like them to split the rift in a consumer and a pro version. The consumer one could stay within their 300$ limit and fov of the devkit. The pro version could cost 500$, with two displays(or better ppi and better optics) and wider fov, cameras for AR, etc...

Yummy!

If they were somehow able to get their hands on a "better ppi" screen like you say. You can be certain they would make sure it would be on a standard version, not a "pro" one.

Some people seem to be under the impression that more pixels means higher cost. This is not the case. As time goes on, price goes down, performance goes up. This is why companies like Apple could release an iPad 3 at the same cost of the iPad 2 at the same price, but with 4x the pixel density.

Then the two screens variation. Get the point?
And, ähh, only 2x pixel density (iPad)- feeling as if i have to be picky because you did quote me

[laast]

It seems that they already have a very thought-out plan.

Of course they have a plan. It's a multi-millions dollars company, do you think they're just improvising and playing with the money of their investors?

DK2 will be available for developpers as soon as consumer version specs will be established, and the test period completed. So yes, not before early/mid 2014.

[Kamus]

Kamus- LG is getting into the mobile OLED game so it's somewhat possible we may see OLED.

I think OLED could happen by the time the consumer version hits... But it would be at 1080p, not 2560x1440. I don't think anyone outside of Samsung is capable of doing OLED at higher resolutions. Like i said, they are about a year ahead everyone else in development when it comes to resolution.

But if you read between the lines, I think the people at Oculus have suggested numerous times that OLED just isn't going to happen. And if i had to take my pick between a 60Hz OLED and a 60Hz LCD with 2x resolution; I'd go with LCD every time. (contrast be damned!)

If we didn't need resolution so much with the rift, I'd prefer the contrast (like for instance, i'd much rather have a 50" OLED HDTV than a 50" 4k HDTV).

Now, if we had a 1080p OLED that was capable of 120hz... then it's a tough one... I think we'd be better off with an OLED if that was the case. (of course, ideally it'd be awesome if we could have our cake and eat it... a 2560x1440@120hz OLED. But i don't think even Samsung is capable of making such a beast right now)

Anyway, I think 2560x1440 LCD is what we'll get. I don't see why they would go for lower resolution than that if those panels become widely available next year.

[Kamus]

Then the two screens variation. Get the point?
And, ähh, only 2x pixel density (iPad)- feeling as if i have to be picky because you did quote me

First off, there really is no "two screen variation" the iPad 3 set out to replace the iPad 2, and it did. They only lowered the price on the iPad 2 to clear inventory.

And secondly, your math is off... the iPad 3 has FOUR times the pixels the iPad 2 does:

iPad 1 and 2 is 1024x768 which means they have 786,432 pixels
iPad 3 and 4 is 2048x1536 which means they have 3,145,728 pixels

You get 4 times the pixels in a screen exactly the same size, and exactly the same price. (all we had to do is wait a few years for the screens to be developed and the GPUs powerful enough to drive it)

Now, the new 5.6" 2560x1440 LCD panel LG announced is actually not even 2x the resolution 1080p is (it falls 460,800 pixels short)

So if and when 4k screens get ever made at the sizes we need, we will see a very significant difference in detail even if we come from a 1440p screen.

[remosito]

.... that if those 1440p panels become widely available next year.

That is a BIG if in my opinion.

When was the announcement of the first 1080 5.x" prototype. To me seems forever!
And those 1080p panels are just now becoming available widely.



http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/27/lg-d ... nch-1080p/

as this is LG as well. Maybe most pertinent. May 2012.

http://www.engadget.com/2011/10/20/tosh ... esolution/

October 2011!! A 2560x1600 6.1" screen!

THE perfect screen for Rift size/resolution wise already existed 2 years ago!!!


As I said your widely available next year is a bit optimistic.

[mr.uu]

Then the two screens variation. Get the point?
And, ähh, only 2x pixel density (iPad)- feeling as if i have to be picky because you did quote me

First off, there really is no "two screen variation" the iPad 3 set out to replace the iPad 2, and it did. They only lowered the price on the iPad 2 to clear inventory.

And secondly, your math is off... the iPad 3 has FOUR times the pixels the iPad 2 does:

iPad 1 and 2 is 1024x768 which means they have 786,432 pixels
iPad 3 and 4 is 2048x1536 which means they have 3,145,728 pixels

You get 4 times the pixels in a screen exactly the same size, and exactly the same price. (all we had to do is wait a few years for the screens to be developed and the GPUs powerful enough to drive it)

Now, the new 5.6" 2560x1440 LCD panel LG announced is actually not even 2x the resolution 1080p is (it falls 460,800 pixels short)

So if and when 4k screens get ever made at the sizes we need, we will see a very significant difference in detail even if we come from a 1440p screen.

Man, you definately do not want to get the point, do you? Are you even trying to understand what you read or are you just reading the words and then feeling the need to post? Please look carefully what you posted and then what i corrected!

First misunderstanding: I was talking about a rift pro with two screens, to double pixels and/or enhance FOV. I never talked about a two screen variation ipad, lol

And secondly: YOU were writing about pixel DENSITY. If you DOUBLE the density you get four times the pixel, thats not so difficult to understand. No need to look for pixel specs! No need to think you need to correct me.
Unfortunately YOU wrote "4x pixel density" which is clearly WRONG and would mean 16x the amount of pixels. Therefore i corrected you, despite the fact that i did get what you MEANT, so i did write a next to my picky correction.

If you still feel you need to correct my correction then do it. I will not respond anymore, its wasted time and OT.

[Kamus]

That is a BIG if in my opinion.

When was the announcement of the first 1080 5.x" prototype. To me seems forever!
And those 1080p panels are just now becoming available widely.

Well, i did use "if" for a reason

I don't claim to have any insider knowledge of any LCD manufacturing facility. I didn't know about the Toshiba one, i only new about this one:
http://vr-zone.com/articles/2014-flagsh ... 38454.html

But like you stated earlier, these displays have been shown all the way back since 2011... So maybe 2014 is the year we see these screens finally hit the market. And it's my guess there has got to be a reason why Palmer keeps saying "1080p will be the minimum resolution the consumer version will have"
Maybe he knows something we don't.
If they do go with a 1080p panel, i hope it's not an IPS LCD, but an OLED instead. (but i think that's even more unlikely than a higher resolution LCD panel)
But maybe there is hope... that 1080p announcement you linked dates May 27th 2012. And one year later there is plenty of 1080p phones in the market.
The CV could be more than a year away and still make it's 2014 projected deadline, so anything can happen!

First misunderstanding: I was talking about a rift pro with two screens, to double pixels and/or enhance FOV. I never talked about a two screen variation ipad

Oh, i thought you meant 2 different rifts with two different screens, and having understood that, i thought the idea was silly; Because if there is a higher resolution screen that you can get at the same price, it would make no sense to use the lower resolution one, even if there were small savings to be had somehow.

BTW, I don't think a two screen rift is going to happen. It would be an easy way to make a more expensive rift for enthusiasts. But it's probably not worth the engineering challenges it would bring.