Slashdot Mirror
Goldman Sachs: VR and AR "Will Be The Next Generation Computing Platform" Worth $80 Billion By 2025 (roadtovr.com)
An anonymous reader writes: As consumer VR headsets from major players like Facebook, Sony, HTC and Valve head to the market this year, the mainstream consumer market is beginning to catch sight of the technology's potential. Prestigious investment bank Goldman Sachs calls augmented reality and virtual reality "the next generation computing platform" and forecasts an $80 billion market by 2025. "We think this technology has the potential to transform how we interact with almost every industry today, and we think it will be equally transformative both from a consumer and an enterprise perspective," says Heather Bellini, Business Unit Leader in Telecommunications, Media and Technology at Goldman Sachs. "At the end of the day we think VR and AR will be as transformation as the smartphone market."
VR is 3D going no where just a big money pit for wall street to collect cash in.
Linux modi 2.6.26-2-parisc
Ever and ever searching for the next big bubble to sustain its illusion of exponential growth. Were it just a game...
The sad thing is that this "game" is backed by a deep shadow of war, poverty and decline all over the place (all this fight over "intellectual property is also one aspect of that).
Growth can't be exponential vs. a limited phisical world. Pretending it to be is giving us painful "readjustments" with ever increasing frequency.
Cling to your denial.
wonkey_monkey: No it won't.
I'll be back in 9 years to check up on this.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
I can see pedestrians walking with these on straight into oncoming traffic - like the iPhone only worse.
Finally a chance for pickpockets and thieves to make an honest living.
And it TV is the idiot box, this will be the ultimate in creating a new generation of new breed, socially inept of idiots.
Obesity will thrive - no need to get up top change channels.
Girls wearing tight skimpy clothing - well your job just got a lot harder. I bet the first no-clothes on App is a real winner.
...is like going to slashdot for mortgage-advice.
Wait a sec .. Will destroy ?
AR would be huge market. Except on Slashdot where people seemingly lose their shit because more than 5 cameras are pointed at you. I say more than because we're quite ok with privacy invasion and continuous tracking, but don't you dare even consider pointing your far more useful AR device in my direction glasshole.
are vr and ar easy to use for an average user, like a tv or a smartphone( such as not having to wear inconvenient head gear)?
are they useful to everyone(as opposed to a niche of special users like gamers or scientists) like laptops?
if no, (imo it is 'no ', at present and in 2025,) for both questions, then there isn't going to be large market.
who calls scambags "prestigious" after 2008?
By then real life will suck so much for the commoners that VR/AR will be the state-sanctioned escape and control mode.
Scruting the inscrutable for over 50 years.
I can see VR for education purpose. Like see wonders of the world or look a engines/buildings/etc. without having one in the classroom.
It can not replace the real thing. But it will give people a better understanding when seeing it in 3D, and you can look around the object instead of just a flat picture in a text book.
AR. I can see some heads up display helpers. But to many and it will be to much of a distraction. So AR has to be very cheap for people want to buy them for so little use they will give.
But using the VR googles as personal display when traveling on a plane/bus/train/etc. will proppely be the most common use of the googles.
For gaming. I can see some use. (And I personally would get one for this). But again I thing it will go the way of Kinetic and Wii remote. It's a fun new gadget. But people don't want to move around that much. They just want to sit and relax with there game.
Look, I'm sure VR/AR will create some big companies that will provide real products and services for many people, but the problem with all this is that GS and its ilk are just so massive that they can basically make any industry 'the next big thing' regardless of any sort of fundamentals. I mean, they basically set the whole concept of 'fundamentals'. It just makes it trivially easy for these guys to create huge profits for themselves by inflating bubbles in entire sectors. All they need is some basic level of opportunity to wrap their tentacles around.
The situation has to stop. The banking sector is meant to be highly competitive so that scarce capital (savings) is efficiently allocated to the businesses that will produce the best real returns on it. But with zero interest rates and the massive global scale of the banks, they basically just map out which areas are going to have lots of liquidity piped into them, and it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. I don't think it is even a big conspiracy. It's just stupidity all around by people who think having lots of fiat currency is the same thing as happiness, and people who spent so much energy getting into power, they have no idea what to do when there.
Personally I think the best solution now is probably to implement a UBI, but with the amount set by an independent central bank. The central bank could then give up on pretending to control the supply of money through interest rates and directly control inflation using the UBI payment. The basket of goods included in the inflation measurement would effectively become a set of essentials that the central bank targets price stability on, and then the rest of the economy can play whatever games it wants. This would prevent populist government from increasing the UBI to a point that was unsustainable. The downside is that there would be no guarantee that the UBI would cover all essential needs, but I think those sorts of rich/poor transfers will always need to be dealt wiht through the existing political process. If you tried to bake a solution into the UBI then one side would just spend all their energy undermining the whole UBI concept.
It won't mean these technologies don't have their uses but they'll probably occupy a niche for a long time to come. VR might be useful for playing racing / flight sims and so on but hardly mainstream uses.
"We invested in this technology before we realized it was the technological equivalent of putting retirement funds into Beanie Babies. Let's talk it up so that we can sell it all off to our technology-illiterate investor and let them take the loss when it all collapses."
"We've made our investment, now pump up the bubble for us. We'll let you know when we got out."
VR headsets will saturate the market once porn finds the platform useful. It's not a joke: the internet is useful, and not going away, but the pornography is the market share that saturates the internet (just like the VRC market years ago.....). http://www.covenanteyes.com/2012/06/01/how-big-is-the-pornography-industry-in-the-united-states/ I expect that porn will eventually do the same thing for VR.
VR can't be massive until there is a cheap way to walk around virtual spaces like you're actually walking around them. AR, though, has implications for businesses everywhere. Some of them are ALREADY using the technology to make it easier to do maintenance by showing the procedures alongside the parts, which is where it's really going to kick ass. No more walking back and forth to the workbench to look at the documentation you printed out... no more printing it out to begin with
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Because he's going to want to sell you a ridiculously priced stock in an IPO.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Perfect for games. I've always wanted this ever since ASUS V3800 included LCD shutter glasses with the nVidia TNT2. I played Unreal, Need for Speed, Doom and many others in 3D, it blew my mind as a kid that suddenly all of the games I enjoyed could be enhanced in such a way at the click of the button. Any game that supported a 3D API could be played this way (if your monitor supported 120Hz refresh at that resolution, which limited me to 800x600). The 3DS is great too and showed how 3D could help create new puzzles, Mario 3D Land and Zelda showed that off quite well. I just hope they don't stop building inexpensive 3D displays.
Twinstiq, game news
Prestigious investment banks don't get fined $5 billion for ripping off their customers.
What the fuck does a bank know about VR, AR, and tech trends? They're eons behind on tech.. probably still running COBOL servers.
They are saying that revenues for VR/AR will be larger than revenues of all consoles and PCs combined by 60%. That's a pretty optimistic projection, than 60% more people than bother with console or pc gaming today will suddenly do so for the sake of VR. Ignoring too the fact that most pc/console gaming folks probably don't have the patience for this.
Now I'm all for it and have a DK2 myself, but know myself to be in a minority.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Note that the optics result in the scene focusing at a much larger distance. about 5 feet away in the current headsets.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Hell a high end PC that costs $3500 barely runs a rift smooth enough to not cause puke fountain and headache.
Huh? My i5 Ivy bridge with a GTK 660 drives my rift fine for a lot of experiences. I don't think I've seen a 'made for VR' experience that pushed it, just some non-VR projects with VR shoehorned in that had graphics so high as to push things hard.
They also have positional timewarp to smooth things out.
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
Nobody bothers with 3D in video games because it's just not worth the effort to get a slight depth effect while halving the visual fidelity compared to 2D. It had nothing to do with absolute horsepower - this effect will still occur when consoles are 100x as powerful. If the effect of 3D TV was more impressive it would make up for the quality loss, but it isn't. The effect of 3D TV is quite astoundingly mediocre, and nobody wants to trade lower visual fidelity for that.
VR is not the same at all. The effect of VR is impressive enough that you can accept a lower visual fidelity as a positive tradeoff in return for experiencing VR. The visual fidelity will be at the level of "yes, the console can do this smoothly". It won't be as good as 2D games on the same hardware, but there's no direct comparison anyway - VR games are designed for VR, 2D games don't really work on VR. So you'll have 2D games looking fantastic and VR games looking a little more retro but inside fucking VR.
So, yes, you will see PS4 doing VR, when PS VR comes out later this year. The horsepower is there to do the renderings at the lower quality level. The idea there's not enough horsepower is just ignorance based on a misunderstanding of the tradeoffs involved.
God damn that's myopic. Laptops were a niche market until about 10 years ago because the standard model for an office was built around a desktop with only a few edge cases receiving the portability of a laptop. Now that the prices have dropped and people have seen the flexibility that procuring laptops for everyone provides, always connected, being able to work from home when you took the day off to take care of your sick kid or spouse; offices and people are buying laptops more than desktops. Cell phones were a niche market until the price went down and people saw that it was stupid to own a landline. It's not simplicity or convenience that determines market success, at least not in America. It's utility, price and the appearance of productivity. Think "Guns and Butter" because unlike your sophomoric comment, someone didn't just make that up on the spot.
What the fuck does a bank know about VR, AR, and tech trends?
Plenty in all likelihood. First of this is Goldman Sachs which is decidedly NOT a bank in the sense you are implying. Investment banking involves a lot more than just taking deposits and paying interest. Goldman Sachs is arguably the best investment banking firm out there. The people working at GS are VERY smart and clued in and while they might lie to you to make a buck (like here in all probability), they aren't dumb and for the most part they do know what they are talking about. GS has tech guys and analysts that are better than most of the people who read slashdot. I know a few personally and they are anything but clueless.
Now here is the thing. You have to ask WHY they are spouting off seeming nonsense. Remember that investment banking is basically the business of selling financial instruments. So odds are they are trying to convince someone to buy something by using overly rosy claims about the future prospects of the industry. VR will absolutely not be a $90B industry. There simply aren't enough use cases. It will be a useful niche but not much more. Augmented Reality might one day be but that day is a fair ways off unless you use a very broad definition of AR.
They're eons behind on tech.. probably still running COBOL servers.
You're saying the banks are behind on tech when you don't even know what the banks do or how they operate. You are regurgitating some old tripe about how they have old servers running and implying that is somehow representative of their tech prowess. Yes some banks have some very old (and very reliable) code running. That isn't the majority of their IT infrastructure nor does it follow that because of a bit of old code that they are behind on tech. They're actually pretty darn tech savvy and they have to be to compete these days. If you are going to critique banks (and there is plenty to critique) then at least get yourself clued in so you don't sound ignorant.
'Sachs calls augmented reality and virtual reality "the next generation computing platform"'
Blah blah blah... That's what that hippy with the dreadlocks used to say back in the 90s.
Prestigious investment banks don't get fined $5 billion for ripping off their customers.
Sure they do. You may not admire them and I get that, but Goldman Sachs is very well respected in many circles and has been for a very long time. GS is as prestigious an investment bank as exists. The fact that they are two timing scumbags who would sell their own mother up the river strangely does not seem to affect their status much.
It's no different than the folks here who dislike Apple or Google. They are still well regarded companies even though you can easily make an argument that their behavior has been less than honorable at times. Some like them and some don't and both side have a valid point.
Could this be just a fad? I find it hard to believe people will willingly shut themselves off from the world using some isolation-helmet, much less them replacing regular display devices. It's awkward, will get tiresome after a while and almost completely isolates you from your surroundings. Other than a novelty toy, I just don't see people preferring this to watching TV with their families or friends. Maybe your stereotypical basement dweller, but even his neck (and left hand) will get tired after a while.
They can't even predict what'll happen in the next few months let alone ten years:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/...
The history of technology is awash in the tears of engineers who tried to make people wear something that looks as hideous as a VR headset.
They recently bought new crystal balls, their prediction is also confirmed by astral conjunction and they read it in their CEO palm reading. No doubt.
-- Laurent Pointal
fun to know there are people engaging in basic logical fallacies like you.
Goldman Sachs already lives in a virtual reality of their own.
Working with headphones is frowned upon, if not completely forbidden in most workplaces. You really think working with a VR/AR headset will be tolerated?
If one day 80% of the population is on the autism spectrum, sure. Until then, not a chance.
I mean, they were right about that one. Kind of. Somehow.
Windows 2000 - from the guys who brought us edlin
Did tablet computing fail the first time because the technology was immature, or because people hate looking like assholes tapping on this flat rectangular thing?
Nobody, and I mean _nobody_, knows how a technology will turn out until it is actually out there. Often, a technology needs years of development before its potential becomes evident. Otherwise, Apple would have given up on portable computing with the Newton. Every time you use your smartphone, think on that.
But Sony already have a VR solution for the PS4. It's actually been shown to, and used by, many games journalists. I think they use a coprocessor or DSP (or more than one?) to offload the VR processing. The public don't actually know how they do it, but what is certain is that they have done it. Plus, from all reports, they're doing it at 120fps.
The PS VR is lower resolution than Rift/Vive. I'm sure that helps. There may also be optimisations due to the fixed platform. Also, this will all be around the same price as the PS4 itself. At least that's what Sony are aiming for, from what I've heard.
Every time I hear about VR in the news I think of the book Ready Player One and how society in the story reacts to mass adoption of VR.