Just in Time for Daydream, YouTube Launches Its Standalone VR App (techcrunch.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Coinciding with the debut of Google's new Daydream View VR headset, YouTube this morning announced the launch of its YouTube VR app, which is available first on Daydream. The standalone application turns all of YouTube's content into an immersive experience, even if the videos weren't built for VR viewing. To do so, YouTube VR will display standard videos in a virtual movie screen in app's new theater mode. Of course, 360 degree videos on YouTube will work best in this app. In the theater mode, the video itself fills the main portion of the screen, while video information -- like the title and description -- is off on one side. The other side of the screen displays your queue so you can see what's coming up next. Player controls are down at the bottom. This way, you can watch and browse at the same time, says Google.

Comments

We need VR

[110010001000]

VR will be important as it will be the only escape once Trump reduces the planet to a smoking ruin. I can't wait to get a VR experience of a double wide trailer.

Priorities

[Anonymous Coward]

Pointless VR "feature" that nobody will use more than twice: Critical.

Fixing critical local privilege escalation vulnerability that ANY application can exploit reliably and with little effort to obtain superuser privileges on Android, and which was fixed upstream a month ago, and which distros run by *volunteers* repackaged and released IN THE SAME DAY to their users: Nope.

Good job, Google.

Re:Priorities

[110010001000]

You don't get bonuses or kudos for fixing bugs.

Re: Priorities

[Jeremi]

As you know, there is only one programmer working at Google, and he can only work on one issue at a time. That's why the vr program's development delayed your big fix.

The VR fad

[malditaenvidia]

Every step of the way, corporations seem more and more invested in VR, and every step of the way, consumer grade VR seems to fall victim of its own shortcomings, like needing an entire room for it to avoid accidents, the isolation aspect and almost absolute lack of software and content for these systems. What exactly are they seeing in VR in the long run?

Re:The VR fad

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't speak for the corporations, but I've got a Vive and a 3x2 meter space, and I like it a lot! There are more games on Steam than I can play with a full day-time job on my hands, so I can't really complain for lack of content. Not sure what all the negativity is about.

Re:The VR fad

[Greyfox]

There are a decent number of games for the Vive on steam, and Virtual Desktop can already play 360 degree videos from Youtube in VR. There are a respectable number of 360 degree videos on youtube, too. It's astounding how much more "real" a 360 degree wingsuit video is in VR versus just looking at a video on a flat screen, even a 4K flat screen.

The most compelling argument you can make for VR is to put a helmet on someone's head and let them play around for a few minutes. So far, 100% of the people who've tried mine have said they want one, and I've had a couple of inquiries about building a VR-Capable system for someone. That being said, gaming in VR is somewhat self-limiting. Ultimately there's only so long I want to keep that helmet on my head, and some of the Vive games can be a pretty decent workout. I don't see VR replacing conventional displays anytime soon, but it's already a great addition to a gaming setup.

Re:The VR fad

[Howitzer86]

It's the hipster thing to do at the moment. What they fail to understand, is that these headsets aren't like the old school HMDs. Computers now are really freakishly fast, environments are super realistic, FOV is wider than ever, and there is better, faster (not at all sickening), head tracking, to the degree that if you just have one eyeball, you can still get that intense, engrossing experience.

These people don't get that. They think of that Lawnmower Man movie, and all the VR hype of the 80s and early 90s, and think "not this again," not realizing what they're missing, or that the thing they criticize is totally different from what they remember.

Re:The VR fad

[Howitzer86]

...that being said. Smart phone VR - or anything without head tracking for that matter, is kind of a lack luster experience. It's like the difference between watching a 3D movie at the theater, and stepping into your local university's CAVE. I honestly think there could be a market for just the head tracking feature alone. The brain derives more meaningful depth information from that lateral movement than it does from eyeball triangulation, IMHO.

Re:The VR fad

[sethaw]

It seems to me that with this app you can now watch standard videos with a device that effectively have a large screen, is portable, and doesn't use much storage space.

Without VR you don't have anything that does all three of those. You would have to choose between a mobile device with a small screen for portablity, or a large tv/projector which you can't move to a different room easily.

That seems like a valid use case to me and not something that has to be a fad.

Re:The VR fad

[omtinez]

Replying to undo the accidentally troll mod. Sorry!

Wow, how innovative

[wonkey_monkey]

In the theater mode, the video itself fills the main portion of the screen, while video information -- like the title and description -- is off on one side. The other side of the screen displays your queue so you can see what's coming up next. Player controls are down at the bottom. This way, you can watch and browse at the same time, says Google.

Uh, you mean just like looking at it in a browser? With "what's next" or suggestions on the right, title and comments below? That way, you can watch and browse at the same time!

Re:Wow, how innovative

[Yvan256]

Yes but this is on the Internet, in a browser, in 3D and in VR so it's probably eligible for fifteen different patents.

Re:Wow, how innovative

[dinfinity]

It's even more retarded than that: Youtube's browser view on a normal monitor is 50% whitespace, so apparently users want everything crammed together instead of having the interface utilize the available screen estate.

Re:Let Trump rule a virtual country.

[nospam007]

"Slip some goggles on him during his 1/2 hour of sleep per night. Nobody tell the fucking idiot it's not real, let's see how long we can make it last."

Too late, he has been in his own virtual reality for 70 years now.

I'm AC, so what?

[Anonymous Coward]

I picked up a Daydream for development purposes today and I've gotta say I'm quite disappointed. The Daydream headset is a step backwards in every way compared to the Cardboard: the headset only works on (currently) one ($800) phone, you cannot use an unsupported phone at all in the headset, you couldn't use Cardboard apps even if your phone was supported, the headset - while of nice construction - uses consumer unfriendly torx screws over perfectly fine phillips, flathead, or hex screws, the controller can only be charged using USB-C instead of a replaceable battery or micro USB, and the USB-C cable is sold separately! Cardboard will run on anything with a touchscreen and a gyroscope. It works on iPhone, Android, Windows Phone, Chinese phones, Samsung phones, who gives a shit what it is, it'll work with Cardboard. THAT is what Google should focus on: a cheap, accessible, high quality VR viewer to cater to the market excluded by Samsung.

The headset itself isn't even anything different than a standard $20 plastic Cardboard headset. It has no extra sensors, no lens focusing (not that you need it), no nothing. It's 2 lenses, a bit of molded plastic, some cloth, 2 springs, a few screws and rubber nubs, and some sort of chip newer smartphones can detect to auto-launch the app (NFC?). Oh, and the controller, which is just a pointer and some buttons (most of which are dedicated). Smartphone manufacturers outside of Google have no incentive to even make their phones "Daydream compatible". Take Samsung: they couldn't give a shit. They already have their own (superior) headset that will work with anything new they release. Why should they ever strive to make their phones compatible?

Instead of building a proper peripheral they've just built yet another walled garden. It's a damn good thing we can support Daydream for free when we include Cardboard support, because as it stands we can't even develop for the fucking thing without investing an extra grand - something we're not about to do when Oculus will ship us triple that in loaned hardware just for saying hello.

capcha: banned