Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 10:33:26 -0500 From: "Ian Hooper" Subject: Re: Is VR dead? Sender: To: <3d-ui@hitl.washington.edu> Reply-to: <3d-ui@hitl.washington.edu> Message-id: <3C727046.7010003@ptc.com> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Content-type: MULTIPART/ALTERNATIVE; BOUNDARY="Boundary_(ID_q0oJJqSPvjcqUdSCzlos+A)" Importance: Normal X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Accept-Language: en-us X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 References: <000701c1b912$e3c51b20$c829ef82@BINKY> X-Authentication-warning: torch.hitl.washington.edu: majordom set sender toowner-3dui@hitl.washington.edu using -f X-Priority: 3 (Normal) This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --Boundary_(ID_q0oJJqSPvjcqUdSCzlos+A) Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT I agree that things have not moved as quickly as we all might have thought 5 years ago, but far from being dead, I think that VR is on the verge of another renaissance. However, our definition of VR may need some flexibility. For an example of developments on either end of the spectrum, I point to the European Astrophysical Virtual Observatory and at the other end, there is the fact that Sony is now marketing the Olympus Eye-trek for use with its Playstation 2 game system. Certainly this second example does not include head tracking, but it represents a mass market interest in HMDs again. Coupled with the decent horsepower of the new game boxes, and there is a real possiblity for some growth here. Add to this mix the spread of high speed internet and the maturity of 3d chat environments like Moove's online community , and I think many pieces are coming together. Thanks, Ian Anders Backman wrote: >Hi all. > >After working a couple of years in the VR community it seems that things >have changed, a lot. > >Someone said: - The failure of gloves and goggles. >Refering to that using an HMD and goggles (with trackers) was supposed >to change the way >Of life. But it has failed. Due to sloppy hardware, latency (sloppy >hardware?) >Cables, high costs etc... > >I can see some areas where VR is still alive: > >* Visualizations using Powerwall (car industry, research, oil) >Usually in the car industry no trackersystems are used, they just don't >work. > >* Driving simulators www.oryx.se is a good example of that. > >Ok, there are some applications using HMD:s too, but are they really >making a profit? >How many are they? > > >I can see some trends: > >* A lot of VR companies are struggling to survive. (some are already >gone) >They still try to charge a lot of money for products not delivering what >they should. >People blaim interaction methods, bad hardware, bad software. > >* In the latest Medicine meets VR conference a lot of researchers were >using game engines such as Unreal, Quake etc.. >They are for free (but beware of the monster warning. Some research >results show that test subjects are afraid that monsters will jump to >them behind the next turn, just because the "feeling" of the >environment.) > >* Try to find a decent HMD nowdays, its impossible. None is doing any >development in this area. Nothing really new. (VRT will change the way >of life, anyone heard thatone before?) >It seems that company research in the VR-hardware area has stalled? > >* Vrsource website, not much new there compared to gamasutra and all the >other game sites. > >* A lot of research institutes have VR websites dated 00 and older. > >* More and more research seems to directly be aimed at gaming and >animation (more money?) > >So Im looking forward to a discussion here. >(I will probably also publish this onto the Vrsource webforum!) > >I really look forward to the VR2002 conference. >I really don't want VR to be dead. So prove me wrong. > >Is VR dead? > > >________________________________________________________________ > Anders Backman Email: andersb@cs.umu.se > HPC2N/VRlab Phone: +46 (0)90-786 9936 > Umea university Cellular: +46 (0)70-392 64 67 > S-901 87 UMEA SWEDEN Fax: +46 90-786 6126 > http://www.cs.umu.se/~andersb > > -- * Ian Hooper * User Interface Design Specialist 416-595-8308 ************************************************************ --Boundary_(ID_q0oJJqSPvjcqUdSCzlos+A) Content-type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT I agree that things have not moved as quickly as we all might have thought 5 years ago, but far from being dead, I think that VR is on the verge of another renaissance. However, our definition of VR may need some flexibility.  For an example of developments on either end of the spectrum, I point to the European Astrophysical Virtual Observatory and at the other end, there is the fact that Sony is now marketing the Olympus Eye-trek for use with its Playstation 2 game system.  Certainly this second example does not include head tracking, but it represents a mass market interest in HMDs again.  Coupled with the decent horsepower of the new game boxes, and there is a real possiblity for some growth here.  Add to this mix the spread of high speed internet and the maturity of 3d chat environments like Moove's online community, and I think many pieces are coming together.

Thanks,
Ian

Anders Backman wrote:
Hi all.

After working a couple of years in the VR community it seems that things
have changed, a lot.

Someone said: - The failure of gloves and goggles.
Refering to that using an HMD and goggles (with trackers) was supposed
to change the way 
Of life. But it has failed. Due to sloppy hardware, latency (sloppy
hardware?)
Cables, high costs etc...

I can see some areas where VR is still alive:

* Visualizations using Powerwall (car industry, research, oil)
Usually in the car industry no trackersystems are used, they just don't
work.

* Driving simulators www.oryx.se is a good example of that.

Ok, there are some applications using HMD:s too, but are they really
making a profit?
How many are they?


I can see some trends:

* A lot of VR companies are struggling to survive. (some are already
gone)
They still try
 to charge a lot of money for products not delivering what
they should.
People blaim interaction methods, bad hardware, bad software.

* In the latest Medicine meets VR conference a lot of researchers were
using game engines such as Unreal, Quake etc..
They are for free (but beware of the monster warning. Some research
results show that test subjects are afraid that monsters will jump to
them behind the next turn, just because the "feeling" of the
environment.)

* Try to find a decent HMD nowdays, its impossible. None is doing any
development in this area. Nothing really new. (VRT will change the way
of life, anyone heard thatone before?)
It seems that company research in the VR-hardware area has stalled?

* Vrsource website, not much new there compared to gamasutra and all the
other game sites.

* A lot of research institutes have VR websites dated 00 and older.

* More and more research seems to directly be aime
d at gaming and
animation (more money?)

So Im looking forward to a discussion here.
(I will probably also publish this onto the Vrsource webforum!)

I really look forward to the VR2002 conference.
I really don't want VR to be dead. So prove me wrong.

Is VR dead?


________________________________________________________________
 Anders Backman               Email:    andersb@cs.umu.se
 HPC2N/VRlab                  Phone:    +46 (0)90-786 9936
 Umea university              Cellular: +46 (0)70-392 64 67
 S-901 87 UMEA SWEDEN         Fax:      +46 90-786 6126
                              http://www.cs.umu.se/~andersb 



-- 
* Ian Hooper
* User Interface Design Specialist         416-595-8308
****************************