Slashdot Mirror
Wearable 'Backpack PCs' Let You Experience High-End VR On The Go (mashable.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Powerful virtual reality headsets like the Oculus Rift and HTC Vive require powerful PCs with beefy graphics cards to operate. That means you'll usually be tethered to a PC tower in your home. Well, HP and MSI have announced portable 'backpack PCs' designed to be used with high-end virtual reality headsets. These PC internals are built in a backpack enclosure powered by a large battery pack. The HP Omen X weighs less than 10 pounds and has a battery that's big enough to last for up to one hour of gameplay, but you do have the option of swapping out the batteries for uninterrupted VR. Specs include either an Intel Core i5 or i7 processor, up to 32GB of RAM, and at least an Nvidia GTX 970 or AMD R9 290 or higher. The MSI Backpack PC features an Intel Core i7 processor and Nvidia GTX 980 graphics, according to the company. The last of the backpack PC trio is the Zotac Mobile VR. The company hasn't released any specs of the product but the company did state in a blog post, "This mobile solution not only removes the bulk of connecting to the large traditional computer towers of old, but also allows the user to roam freely in VR with their undivided attention. This innovative solution includes a system powerful enough to drive VR, and a portable battery pack to keep you going." There is no pricing or availability information as of yet.
welcome to snowcrash by neal stephenson!
Because:
a) AR is not the same thing as VR or a replacement for it. Those two technologies are pretty much orthogonal to each other, with different use cases. Saying "AR is better/will replace VR" is like saying an airplane will replace car. Both are means of transportation but serving different purposes and used at different times.
b) Hololens is unable to generate a fully immersive scene - has narrow field of view and a lot of problems with achievable contrast (as any see-through display) in brightly lit spaces. This is important for sense of presence. Making a fantasy game (for example) believable is going to be difficult if you have the real world visible in your scene, unless your objective is to make dragons roam your living room. Not a problem for VR.
c) Nobody knows how well (or whether at all) the tracking on Hololens performs - all that was presented were carefully orchestrated demos in controlled conditions and no specs are known. Again not something that is comparable.
d) Performance of the embedded ARM/Intel CPU/GPU combo on something like Hololens is far behind what a desktop CPU/GPU combo are capable of. Hololens is likely comparable to something like GearVR performance-wise and those require a lot of "dumbing down" of the content in order to achieve reasonable frame rates. Moreover Hololens has to also do the optical tracking of the surrounding scene which GearVR does not do - making the problem even worse.
e) Motion sickness is less a factor of how fast the tracking/rendering is but much more a function of content. You can have usable VR at 30fps with no motion sickness and a totally atrocious experience at 120fps if the content is poorly built.
Disclosure - working with VR since 1998 or so :)
Can't wait to try "Get Hit by a Bus Simulator."
First you have to swallow a 360 degree camera pill though. Pooping yourself out is a unique experience.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'