Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

HTC Announces $100 Million Fund For Virtual Reality Startups (roadtovr.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the accelerated-growth dept.

An anonymous reader writes: HTC today announced the Vive X accelerator program through which the company will invest from it's newly created $100 million VR fund. The fund aims to kickstart the VR ecosystem in support of the company's Vive VR headset. Applications for the accelerator program, which will open first in Beijing, Taipei, and San Francisco, are open today. The company says their aim is to "help cultivate, and grow the global VR ecosystem by supporting startups and providing them with expertise, special access to advanced VR technology, financial investment, mentorship and unmatched go-to-market support."

19 of 43 comments (clear)

  1. How about a virtual meeting application? by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

    The article sidebar cites social VR as a way to get the tech rolling. How about a generic business meeting app? Simple avatars like the ones in Second Life would suffice here, because the participants in a specific situation already know each other and are limited in number, so there is no need to get fancy. What would be important is the ways in which people could interact virtually in a meeting space? Could they exchange meaningful informational as easily as face-to-face without the infernal overhead of arranging conference rooms and interrupting normal work routines.

    1. Re:How about a virtual meeting application? by Hadlock · · Score: 2

      What you're describing is called "AltspaceVR", they're sort of Second Life, but with all the bugs worked out in a totally cleansheet design.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    2. Re:How about a virtual meeting application? by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      What we want to do is answer the question: can VR contribute something to the meeting experience that current conferencing tech does not?

    3. Re:How about a virtual meeting application? by suupaabaka · · Score: 2

      I can never quite grasp why, on a site like Slashdot that caters to nerds wanting interesting news about tech and geeky things, there are people who constantly fling passive-aggressive semi-Luddite comments around that contribute nothing to discussion.

      I'm sure there were people like you around in 1876, bashing on the telephone with statements like "It's called a telegram. Try one sometime."

    4. Re:How about a virtual meeting application? by DrXym · · Score: 1

      The answer to that is no. Unless you count enormous complexity and expense as a contributing something.

    5. Re:How about a virtual meeting application? by DrXym · · Score: 1
      Referencing a more convenient, less expensive, well established, proven technology instead of a gimmick isn't being a Luddite, it's being pragmatic.

      Just because something is new tech and geeky doesn't mean it is better than the existing solution. Only last week some group was announcing the "worlds first drone cafe" where you order drinks and they arrived by drone. It doesn't take much to see what a fucking stupid idea that is and the same is the case with a VR conference room.

    6. Re:How about a virtual meeting application? by suupaabaka · · Score: 1

      It seems stupid until you go to Japan and experience multiple forms of automated food delivery to your table. If they can get drones to drop a drink off at your table with a minimum of cost and fuss, what's the problem?

    7. Re:How about a virtual meeting application? by DrXym · · Score: 1
      The "problem" is it is obviously a stupid idea. Flying drones indoors and letting them carry drinks is an invitation for them to unexpectedly fail and land on people, or drop full glasses, or hit beams, or get entangled in decorations, cables, loose balloons etc., or get tipped or knocked over by people on purpose or accidentally walking into them. Then there are mundane matters like having 2 or 3 of them on the go (are they meant to be autonomous or controlled?) and having to charge / switch dozens of batteries / blades. And of course they're no use for collecting empty glasses, wiping tables etc.

      And ultimately they're not doing a damned thing that can't be accomplished by simpler means. A bar might use them as a gimmick but they are not practical in any sense.

  2. When will you people get it through through your h by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    People don't want fucking VR. If people wanted VR, they would be buying VR products. They're not. There is no market. You're solving a problem that doesn't exist. This is the dog from hell. You should take it out back and shoot it. Augmented reality is the future, though not that creepy Google Glass. People don't want VR. I'm saying this for the benefit of anyone who thinks they can make money on VR. Don't try. The market has spoken. They're not interested. Put your time and money elsewhere so you can actually make money.

  3. VR will fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    At best it will be a niche product like for gaming.

    1. Re:VR will fail by aliquis · · Score: 1

      At best it will be a niche product like for gaming.

      And porn and museums and concerts and nature shows and parties and ..

    2. Re:VR will fail by aliquis · · Score: 1

      Have fun at your VR party.

      I meant doing a record of the surroundings to someone not at it to show what's happening.

  4. Yes, there were. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Alex Bell pitched his new telephone idea to the telegram cartel at the time, and they thought it was a complete waste and wouldn't even consider it. So he started his own business, and utterly destroyed them.

  5. Re:When will you people get it through through you by Noxal · · Score: 2

    I bought VR. My husband bought VR. Eat a dick.

  6. Re:When will you people get it through your heads? by Noxal · · Score: 1

    Why AAA titles instead of good titles?

  7. Re:When will you people get it through through you by aliquis · · Score: 1

    I bought VR. My husband bought VR. Eat a dick.

    OMG the immersion! I can even taste it!!

    Personally I want VR.
    VR for (on rails) tours of places and entertainment = Great.
    VR for normal games = Ok I guess if the fidelity of the screen is atleast as good as a normal computer monitor and if it's comfortable.
    VR games stuck in one place with a controller = Not the most interesting, especially if the one above isn't true.
    VR games with some freedom of movement and tracking of the person = Good but since we can't move around everywhere with these kinds of products (Vive and PC) and realistically not even outside if the current reality is completely replaced by a virtual one it will be an on rail experience such as the shot from a vehicle games or Duke Nukem Forever and so on. Not the best.

    Personally I too think the most interesting applications lie in augmented reality where the real world could become more interesting / have additional content brought too it. Missions in the real world. Say table tennis or laser game or whatever in the augmented world. People could do legal graffiti everywhere. Touring and facts about the environment and so on.

    The market and usefulness of augmented reality must be much higher. There's still room for a "Real-life Shadow warrior" where you battle daemons in the somewhat real world. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

  8. In a related news... by LordHighExecutioner · · Score: 1

    ...HTC shareholders announced that they would prefer to see that money distributed as real dividend to shareholders, rather than dissipated into VR thin air.

    1. Re:In a related news... by Thanshin · · Score: 1

      ...HTC shareholders announced that they would prefer to see that money distributed as real dividend to shareholders, rather than dissipated into VR thin air.

      Less vocal HTC shareholders, rejoiced in the fact that decisions are being taken by people with actual business knowledge, instead of incompetents with parents money to invest.

  9. Major problems at VR company by bugmenot1 · · Score: 1

    I work at a VR company in California. A manager from India was telling external recruiters he only wanted resumes of other workers from India. The major qualification was someone who once lived in india so we ended up with a lot of engineers who knew nothing about VR. I checked around and at other major tech companies they almost all had this problem. Why do managers from India break the rules of companies committed to be equal opportunity employers? If you look at your organization chart at your tech company I bet you notice quickly that Indian managers and indian executives have tricked HR and managed to hire only other people from India. At worst I suspect they are racist and believe the blacks, latinos, chinese and caucasian people are inferior. At best they are just hiring their friends into high salary positions. It would be an interesting study to find out what is going on. Check your org chart I bet you will be surprised that this is so very true.