
MozVR - robin_reala
http://mozvr.com/content/2014/11/10/mozvr-launches.html
======
lern_too_spel
Why the hardware restrictions and special browser build requirement? I'd like
to play with this but don't have a Rift. Are there any plans for a slimmed
down version like
[http://vr.chromeexperiments.com/](http://vr.chromeexperiments.com/) that can
work with all the cheap plastic and cardboard phone mount headsets?

~~~
jsnk
The page says:

"We are using the Rift as our initial test and development device, but are
committed to device-agnostic Web VR, with support for additional devices
coming soon."

~~~
lern_too_spel
Thanks. I missed that somehow.

------
angersock
I'm not sure that the Web needs to be in VR.

We've somewhat regressed from even having a set of properly hyperlinked 2D
documents; I don't think that adding a third dimensions is going to
automatically make things better.

I imagine that the true usefulness will be in having clients with larger
working envelopes and virtual spaces to present things. I don't think chat
will take off significantly.

It'll be fun as hell watching things evolve, though.

~~~
corysama
> I'm not sure that the Web needs to be in VR.

Don't think of it as "the Web in VR". Think of it as "VR in the Web".

I don't think the web should be _in_ audio. Hyperlinked 2D documents don't get
better when you put them _in_ sound streams ;) But, having _audio in the Web_
is really nice!

The Web is the discovery/distribution channel. The fact that it is also
possible to wedge hyperlinked 2D documents into a VR environment is
incidental.

------
forrestthewoods
VR demands 90+ FPS with minimum latency and no dropped frames. God I hope
browsers can someday meet that level of performance.

~~~
corysama
They are working on it.

[http://blog.bitops.com/blog/2014/06/26/first-steps-for-vr-
on...](http://blog.bitops.com/blog/2014/06/26/first-steps-for-vr-on-the-web/)

[http://blog.tojicode.com/2014/07/bringing-vr-to-
chrome.html](http://blog.tojicode.com/2014/07/bringing-vr-to-chrome.html)

------
moron4hire
I'm continually surprised and disappointed by the dismissive and negative
reactions that any VR work that isn't John Carmack complaining about Samsung
receives in the developer communities like this one.

Coming in and dismissing out of hand the great work a small group of
volunteers at Mozilla and other places are doing because you read somewhere
you needed a million FPS to avoid constantly vomiting is... I don't know what
it is. Short-sighted. Close-minded. Ignorant.

Yes, lower latency and higher frame rate is always better. That doesn't mean
that the current state isn't good enough for people who claim to be
"visionary" and "early adopters" to get in on the ground floor and start
working on some cutting edge software. You said you wanted to be an innovator?
Here you go. Here's your chance.

You want to know why Google Cardboard exists? So you can get working on
developing VR applications _now_ , for basically free, if you can't afford the
money or wait time for an Oculus Rift DK2. Of course nobody is suggesting you
duct tape a Samsung Galaxy Note 3 to your head and call that done. They're
suggesting that maybe we try to make VR as inclusive as possible, even for
people who can't afford the full kit or are reticent to invest in something
they don't understand yet.

I like my DK2 _and_ I like my cellphone in a cardboard box. The DK2 is more
comfortable, smoother, and looks better, no doubt. The box lets me walk around
and is a hell of a lot easier to get setup. The box has GPS and a camera built
into it already. The box let me work on design ideas long before my DK2 even
made it out of the shipping gate. All of my software will support both, and
will support falling back to 2D displays. That's just good UX: be accessible.

No, this isn't production-ready work yet. Best estimate anyone has is that a
consumer-grade headset will be actually ready sometime next year. That gives
us a little time to try to build the software blocks from scratch. I'm sorry
the community doesn't have VRBootstrap ready to go for you lower-class glue
developers to be able to slap together a disruptive, social coupons app in VR
yet.

I think Oculus is doing great work and I'm grateful for what they have already
done. But have you ever stopped to think that maybe they have an interest in
encouraging a perception that they're the only company in the world worth
bothering for VR hardware?

Have a spirit of adventure already. I got motion sick with my DK2 once because
I had my axes backwards (incidentally, my cardboard box has never made me
motion sick, but that's a different issue entirely). Is that Oculus Rifts
fault? Am I never going to touch it again? Has it in any way changed my
opinion or enthusiasm about VR? Ridiculous questions.

You work on electronics, sometimes you burn your hand with the soldering iron.
You cook, sometimes you cut your finger with the kitchen knife. Sometimes
things take more than a weekend hackathon to finish developing. Suck it up and
get back to work.

And quit knocking on the efforts of others who are working on this stuff just
because you're too scared to put on the goggles.

~~~
convulsive
Don't worry. If HN hates it, it's probably going to be important. :)

------
yarrel
Are they using the non-free Oculus Rift SDK?

If so this is another example of just how little Mozilla understands its own
mission.

~~~
dmarcos
I work at Mozilla. The VR browser APIs are designed to be hardware agnostic.
If we link against the Oculus SDK is because the Rift is the only affordable
HMD that is currently available.

