Slashdot Mirror
iFixit Takes Apart the Oculus Rift DK2, Finds Galaxy Note 3 Display Inside
An anonymous reader writes with a teardown from iFixit of the Oculus Rift Development Kit 2: "iFixit's teardown reveals lots of interesting hardware within, including 40 infrared LEDs, a well-organized motherboard, and a display panel lifted directly from a Samsung Galaxy Note 3. They also took apart the IR tracking camera for good measure."
The review is the usual iFixit blend of funny, concise and technical; they include a nice shot showing those IR sources embedded in the plastic of the frame. Why the straight-from-a-phone display? "This seems to make economical sense, since Oculus is working to ship something like 45,000 DK2s—a goodly number for a mid-development prototype, but certainly not enough to warrant a fully custom display."
Just kidding. Hopefully.
It would be funny for Samsung to jump and say "hey you, copyright infringer!"
...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
Samsung and LG both sell their TV panels to a lot of competitors to build their own sets, it's not shocking at all to hear they do the same with their mobile screens. Anyways, it's a stellar looking screen, running a commonplace resolution (1920x1080), why wouldn't they want to use it?
It's disappointing to see that each eye is just 1/2 1080p because it uses a single 1080p phone display shared by both eyes.
I thought that Oculus had always planned on using off-the-shelf cell phone displays. If they can keep the retail price under $300, they will sell a ton of units.
Dual screens was never in the plans for any Rift, why would it be a surprise or a disappointment? The consumer version is expected to use at least a 2560x1440 display.
Don't let anybody tell you they fixed the pukeyness of VR with low persistence!
It's still up to the software not to make the user sick.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Yo dawg, I hear you like specs ... I 'spec the specs for your specs aren't what you'd 'spec.
Just remember, just because the marketing department says something, doesn't mean carries the same meaning as you and I would assign to it.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Does such a display exists? I always assumed that that's what they were doing. I can imagine that it would much more. It might be cheaper to use one small 4K display than 2 smaller 1080p ones.
Finish this.. I've been waiting since the iGlasses came out in 1997..
..don't panic
I don't know how practical it will be, but this looks much cooler:
http://www.laserfocusworld.com...
Was I the only one who was reminded of this battery "hack" when I read the title?
My understanding is they need OLED displays because they have VERY short refresh times and Samsung is the the big player in OLED. If the refresh time is too long it results in motion sickness. That's my guess on the reason they are using Samsung displays. The real question is can they do a deal with Samsung and if not is there another display with a sufficiently short refresh times?
The cheapest and simplest thing for Samsung to do for a relatively small run of only 45k devices is to literally lift existing pre-built screens directly off the Note 3 assembly line and hand them over to Oculus. Virtually any kind of customization, like removing the Gorilla glass or touchscreen controller would require an assembly line change and could result in a much larger production slow down. I know it's hard to believe that 'wasting' unnecessary materials is actually cheaper than removing them, but if you know anything about manufacturing you understand the enormous impact that an assembly line change can have.
A total of 1920x1080 for both eyes might be passable, but NOT when that 1920x1080 isn't actually 1920x1080.
The Note 3 has a pentile display - you're getting significantly reduced chroma resolution.
The LG G3 has a 4K display. There is also a rumor that Samsung will release a version of the Galaxy S5 with a 4K display.
So, the Google Cardboard VR Goggles weren't so ridiculous after all (http://googlecardboardkit.com).
It's quad HD, not 4K
QuadHD is 2560x1440
4K is 3840 x 2160
Ah, Marketing....
It's disappointing to see that each eye is just 1/2 1080p because it uses a single 1080p phone display shared by both eyes.
It is 1080p though. There are 1080 horizontal lines running vertically per eye. It's the horizontal resolution that's split in two.
It's not about the cost. Carmack talked about it in one QuakeCon keynote. It's much, much simpler to render two views on one screen than trying to use two physical screens.