[coalescence]

We've had a dev kit at work for a while and it's the first headset that I've not wanted to take off. The ability to move around a scene and the wand make the interaction really intuitive and rewarding. As for the social implications of 'VR lockin', it'll be interesting to watch.

[zanny]

SteamVR uses OpenVR, which is a public API anyone can implement, I believe.

I'm hoping OSVR is successful from Razer.

[ethbro]

Valve deserves to be beaten with an internet flamebat for naming a SteamVR-specific compatibility layer "OpenVR".

If I'm incorrect and there are merits to it, please enlighten me, but everything I've read about OpenVR (and seen in their git repo) seems to only be an accurate name for where the meaning "Open" == null.

[zanny]

The API is BSD licensed[1]. Anyone can use it, it is just not some consortium standard, but anyone can fork it.

https://github.com/ValveSoftware/openvr

[ethbro]

If API + binary blobs + single company control + BSD license is the new definition of open, then... hmm.

They should have called it ValveX. It's the best bad option among worse options (and that's probably why Valve won't put more effort into opening it up until the market matures), but it's not an open standard.

[wmkn]

It's not unlike OpenGL though, which does not have a open source reference implementation either. Only the API specifications are open.

Most implementations are closed source binary blobs. Of course there is Mesa, but that is is also a 3rd party implementation. No one would prevent you from building an open source OpenVR implementation.

[jensvdh]

That's just a bunch of binary blobs though.

[shazow]

The API is open, the SteamVR-specific runtime is a binary blob.

Anyone can implement a driver, they have example driver code available. The documentation is here: https://github.com/ValveSoftware/openvr/wiki

The purpose of OpenVR is to create a common API for HMD drivers, so that other platforms can implement their own proprietary equivalents of SteamVR or what have you, and everyone's HMD drivers will be interoperable.

[dwild]

I probably doesn't understands everything and you probably have more knowledge than me on that but as far as I understands that's more a standard that a library. You still need to write the actual drivers for your headset and as far as I know, the one for the Vive isn't opensource. OpenVR is still open, it's just the Vive drivers that are not.

[Alphasite_]

Nah, SteamVR is their implementation of OpenVR.

[wlesieutre]

What other headsets have you worn?

[VikingCoder]

You've implied that you have tried the Oculus Rift CV1, and that you wanted to take it off.

HAVE you tried the Oculus Rift CV1, and did it make you want to take it off?

[Alphasite_]

Its not necessarily that he wanted to take it off, it may well be that he just didn't want to keep it on.

[VikingCoder]

Frankly your opinion is only interesting if you've tried the Oculus Rift CV1.

[starshadowx2]

I'd assume that if @coalescence works somewhere with a Vive devkit, they would most likely have tried a CV1 as comparison.

[VikingCoder]

So I get downvotes, because you're all assuming rather than directly asking, like I did.

Thanks, HN.

[starshadowx2]

Yeah, you're in the wrong here pretty obviously. you didn't "directly ask", you pretty much just shot down what they said and borderline insulted them.

Really, just reason it out. How many places just have a Vive devkit laying around? You'd specifically need to get one which means they're most likely working on a VR game or software. When you're working on something using new and innovative hardware you're going to check out all the options and competition to make sure you're using the best or most accessible.

I'd say you should take a step back and look over what you've said and consider if it really conveys your meaning well.

[VikingCoder]

I shot them down IF (the most important word in my post) their comparison of the consumer versions of the two most important VR releases is instead a comparison of the consumer version of the Vive, and the DKs of the Rift (or no Rift at all).

I agree, I could have worded my post directly as a question, and if I could edit it, I would.

I'm stunned that you're all allowing coalescence to sit at the table and IMPLY that the Oculus Rift CV1 makes him want to take it off, is not intuitive, and is not rewarding.

[starshadowx2]

> I shot them down...

Yeah, don't do that. It makes you seem like an asshole no matter the context.

> allowing coalescence

That's the thing about opinions. Anyone can have them and they change from person to person.

"it's the first headset that I've not wanted to take off."

You would've been much better off asking if they had tried the CV1 and what they liked/didn't like about it, rather than saying their opinion is uninteresting. It's good that you're starting to recognize that though.

[mwfunk]

You didn't ask. You told him his opinions were meaningless because you assumed he hadn't tried the Rift. I mean, maybe that's not what you were trying to communicate, but that is 100% what you communicated.