Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by bit-tech, 24 Jun 2020.
Rest in peace, Go. You made everyone look bad, and your departure was well overdue.
On the plus side, with Oculus now focusing its efforts on just one VR headset
Don't they have the Rift S and Quest? Two headsets, not one.
Which headset keeps getting updates and new features?
Which headset hardware is actually made by Lenovo and never gotten new features throughout its life?
Yes, they sell 2 products on their website under one branding....... but ........
As @wyx087 says, the Rift S is a Lenovo headset with a different badge and that's why only the Quest has been updated and improved.
The Quest is clearly where they want to be. The Rift was cut loose the very instant it was discontinued(there's a lot of upset Rift owners because their proprietary interface cable failed and there's no replacement parts), and the Rift S was lazily outsourced.
But in fairness, most of the features added to the Quest are actually only relevant to the Quest, and the Rift S inherited a rather nice setup from the original Rift. (Compare the current state of the Rift Home and Quest Home and you realize that they share only a name, with the former being a place you can customize, play around in, and invite friends into, while the latter is a pretty menu)
That said, I still don't understand why the Rift S wasn't a Quest with a different logic board. It has never struck me as reasonable to have two almost completely unrelated products when they could be sharing a LOT of parts between the two.
Of course, ever since they added Oculus Link*, the argument for the Rift S to even EXIST has gotten a lot more tenuous. They exist at the same price point, but the Quest is physically more comfortable(by most counts), has a lens spacing adjustment, runs higher-resolution displays with better color and contrast... AND it can also be unplugged from the "grown-up" computer and used as a sort of VR GameBoy (a "Virtual Boy", if you will).
The only thing the Rift S has going for it is display refresh rate, and it's not THAT much different(72 vs 80 Hz, both down from the 90 of the original Rift and Vive)
There is, to my eye, literally no reason to buy a Rift S, even if you only intend to use your headset for PC VR.
*Also, screw Oculus Link. Buy Virtual Desktop on the Quest and the Quest can do PC VR wirelessly(though facebook makes you jump through an extra hoop or two to enable it). Which is nice if your network behaves(mine usually doesn't, but... my network is far from optimal).
The Rift S is not getting functional additions (it's getting plenty of updates) because it shares an identical support-base to CV1. The two are intended to be functionally interchangeable, to the point that any hardware setup that meets the performance criteria for CV1 also meets it for Rift S. This means all their PC headsets have the exact same performance target and the exact same functional target. Adding hand-tracking (for example) to Rift S would now mean developers have to target two different PC install bases: those who can track hands and those who cannot.This was stated explicitly before Rift S even started shipping.
Quest, on the other hand, is a unitary platform. Additions can be rolled out without breaking prior support or leaving half the install base incompatible with newer software.
Anyone with a Rift S and a Quest hooked to a PC side by side will pick the Rift S every day of the week for PC use. Comfort is higher, visual clarity is MUCH better (both improved optics, a higher number of subpixels, and an improved fill-factor), visual distortion is lower (optics have a MUCH larger eyebox), pixel persistence time is lower, subjective contrast is very close (neither CV1 nor Quest use true black due to the OLED power-on delay time, and the sealed environment mean your eyes adapt to the available contrast range of the panel), and you do not have visual quality and update latency impacted by video compression to 150mbit.
Quest is fantastic for portable use. But if I'm at home, or taking a HMD to somewhere with a PC at the other end: Rift S every time, no hesitation whatsoever.
The screen technology used in Rift S is indeed superior to OLED in quest. I saw this the other day: https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/hg54b8/sde_rift_s_left_vs_quest_right/ I was amazed at the difference.
Hand tracking will indeed divide the install base, something I hadn't thought of. But as far as I know, Rift S didn't get glance-able guardian and guardian object detection. Both are very useful when putting on the headset and mid gameplay. Admittedly still early days, because they just appeared on Quest a few weeks ago.
Going forward, it would appear FB would will want a single device for the mass market, not multiple. It's likely the next device will be Quest-like in feature but without compromises when working as PCVR. Rift may remain just as an Oculus PCVR brand name or development standard.
It had Passthrough+ (depth remapped passthrough) and triggerable passthrough at launch.
Separate names with a comma.