Samsung developing 'wireless and dedicated' VR headsets

[Deleted User]

The user and all related content has been deleted.

SpottyGekko

Not surprising in the least.

The Gear VR is a gimmick, not a serious contender in the VR market. If Samsung want to be a real contender, they HAVE to develop a full fledged VR headset.

SEANMCAD

If they can get the response time they need from a low profile wireless connection that they need for VR then that technology will be good for a lot of things, not just VR.

maskedweasel

They're going to waste money on a separate set -- though it will likely be the best out of the wired sets seeing as how it will be wireless -- but they would be better off increasing the power of their phones - that people already will buy -- instead of these frivolous things that will fall to the wayside. 

SEANMCAD

maskedweasel said:

They're going to waste money on a separate set -- though it will likely be the best out of the wired sets seeing as how it will be wireless -- but they would be better off increasing the power of their phones - that people already will buy -- instead of these frivolous things that will fall to the wayside. 

yeah I dont even have a wireless mouse! but I am not a fan of wires. go figure I know I dont even understand that but its true.

you have a wireless mouse?

maskedweasel

SEANMCAD said:

maskedweasel said:

They're going to waste money on a separate set -- though it will likely be the best out of the wired sets seeing as how it will be wireless -- but they would be better off increasing the power of their phones - that people already will buy -- instead of these frivolous things that will fall to the wayside. 

yeah I dont even have a wireless mouse! but I am not a fan of wires. go figure I know I dont even understand that but its true.

you have a wireless mouse?

I have a bluetooth mouse for my gaming laptop that works really well.  Wireless is preferred if you're going to be moving around a lot I'd imagine.   I wouldn't have got my GF the gear VR headset for her kids if it came with a wire.  It would get yanked out of a PC.. they'd get caught up in it.. or it would eventually get frayed. 

SEANMCAD

maskedweasel said:

SEANMCAD said:

maskedweasel said:

They're going to waste money on a separate set -- though it will likely be the best out of the wired sets seeing as how it will be wireless -- but they would be better off increasing the power of their phones - that people already will buy -- instead of these frivolous things that will fall to the wayside. 

yeah I dont even have a wireless mouse! but I am not a fan of wires. go figure I know I dont even understand that but its true.

you have a wireless mouse?

I have a bluetooth mouse for my gaming laptop that works really well.  Wireless is preferred if you're going to be moving around a lot I'd imagine.   I wouldn't have got my GF the gear VR headset for her kids if it came with a wire.  It would get yanked out of a PC.. they'd get caught up in it.. or it would eventually get frayed. 

I prefer wires. I assume you dont but there is a problem with advancing wireless technology?

maskedweasel

SEANMCAD said:

maskedweasel said:

SEANMCAD said:

maskedweasel said:

They're going to waste money on a separate set -- though it will likely be the best out of the wired sets seeing as how it will be wireless -- but they would be better off increasing the power of their phones - that people already will buy -- instead of these frivolous things that will fall to the wayside. 

yeah I dont even have a wireless mouse! but I am not a fan of wires. go figure I know I dont even understand that but its true.

you have a wireless mouse?

I have a bluetooth mouse for my gaming laptop that works really well.  Wireless is preferred if you're going to be moving around a lot I'd imagine.   I wouldn't have got my GF the gear VR headset for her kids if it came with a wire.  It would get yanked out of a PC.. they'd get caught up in it.. or it would eventually get frayed. 

I prefer wires. I assume you dont but there is a problem with advancing wireless technology?

It isn't advancing wireless technology... wireless technology is pretty advanced in many iterations. Hololens is wireless - for example -  and cell phones are fantastic in the way of wireless technology that everyone has.

They should be advancing technology based on their cell phones.. increase the power of that - they'll get much more use out of it.  Just like with Hololens people will find more value in a set that does more than just plays games or watches movies.  Nobody wants just a TV strapped to their head everywhere they go.

SEANMCAD

maskedweasel said:

SEANMCAD said:

maskedweasel said:

SEANMCAD said:

maskedweasel said:

They're going to waste money on a separate set -- though it will likely be the best out of the wired sets seeing as how it will be wireless -- but they would be better off increasing the power of their phones - that people already will buy -- instead of these frivolous things that will fall to the wayside. 

yeah I dont even have a wireless mouse! but I am not a fan of wires. go figure I know I dont even understand that but its true.

you have a wireless mouse?

I have a bluetooth mouse for my gaming laptop that works really well.  Wireless is preferred if you're going to be moving around a lot I'd imagine.   I wouldn't have got my GF the gear VR headset for her kids if it came with a wire.  It would get yanked out of a PC.. they'd get caught up in it.. or it would eventually get frayed. 

I prefer wires. I assume you dont but there is a problem with advancing wireless technology?

It isn't advancing wireless technology... wireless technology is pretty advanced in many iterations. Hololens is wireless - for example -  and cell phones are fantastic in the way of wireless technology that everyone has.

They should be advancing technology based on their cell phones.. increase the power of that - they'll get much more use out of it.  Just like with Hololens people will find more value in a set that does more than just plays games or watches movies.  Nobody wants just a TV strapped to their head everywhere they go.

They are making the wireless faster and with a lower overall profile. how is that not advancing wireless?

maskedweasel

SEANMCAD said:

maskedweasel said:

SEANMCAD said:

maskedweasel said:

SEANMCAD said:

maskedweasel said:

They're going to waste money on a separate set -- though it will likely be the best out of the wired sets seeing as how it will be wireless -- but they would be better off increasing the power of their phones - that people already will buy -- instead of these frivolous things that will fall to the wayside. 

yeah I dont even have a wireless mouse! but I am not a fan of wires. go figure I know I dont even understand that but its true.

you have a wireless mouse?

I have a bluetooth mouse for my gaming laptop that works really well.  Wireless is preferred if you're going to be moving around a lot I'd imagine.   I wouldn't have got my GF the gear VR headset for her kids if it came with a wire.  It would get yanked out of a PC.. they'd get caught up in it.. or it would eventually get frayed. 

I prefer wires. I assume you dont but there is a problem with advancing wireless technology?

It isn't advancing wireless technology... wireless technology is pretty advanced in many iterations. Hololens is wireless - for example -  and cell phones are fantastic in the way of wireless technology that everyone has.

They should be advancing technology based on their cell phones.. increase the power of that - they'll get much more use out of it.  Just like with Hololens people will find more value in a set that does more than just plays games or watches movies.  Nobody wants just a TV strapped to their head everywhere they go.

They are making the wireless faster and with a lower overall profile. how is that not advancing wireless?

I don't know what you mean by them making "wireless faster"  there is no speed necessary to remove wires from a device.  It's already wireless with their current phones.  They already created it.  The profile is already low enough.

It would be smarter to use their current platforms to create devices that do more than VR.  VR headsets aren't going to catch on in the mainstream.. but cell phones already have.  they should have doubled down on that technology specifically for the use of VR.

SEANMCAD

maskedweasel said:

SEANMCAD said:

maskedweasel said:

SEANMCAD said:

maskedweasel said:

SEANMCAD said:

maskedweasel said:

They're going to waste money on a separate set -- though it will likely be the best out of the wired sets seeing as how it will be wireless -- but they would be better off increasing the power of their phones - that people already will buy -- instead of these frivolous things that will fall to the wayside. 

yeah I dont even have a wireless mouse! but I am not a fan of wires. go figure I know I dont even understand that but its true.

you have a wireless mouse?

I have a bluetooth mouse for my gaming laptop that works really well.  Wireless is preferred if you're going to be moving around a lot I'd imagine.   I wouldn't have got my GF the gear VR headset for her kids if it came with a wire.  It would get yanked out of a PC.. they'd get caught up in it.. or it would eventually get frayed. 

I prefer wires. I assume you dont but there is a problem with advancing wireless technology?

It isn't advancing wireless technology... wireless technology is pretty advanced in many iterations. Hololens is wireless - for example -  and cell phones are fantastic in the way of wireless technology that everyone has.

They should be advancing technology based on their cell phones.. increase the power of that - they'll get much more use out of it.  Just like with Hololens people will find more value in a set that does more than just plays games or watches movies.  Nobody wants just a TV strapped to their head everywhere they go.

They are making the wireless faster and with a lower overall profile. how is that not advancing wireless?

I don't know what you mean by them making "wireless faster"  there is no speed necessary to remove wires from a device.  It's already wireless with their current phones.  They already created it.  The profile is already low enough.

It would be smarter to use their current platforms to create devices that do more than VR.  VR headsets aren't going to catch on in the mainstream.. but cell phones already have.  they should have doubled down on that technology specifically for the use of VR.

ok fair enough so this article is about using existing wireless technology so that I can have less wires involved in my VR experience.

Seems reasonable to me. I mean I personally love wires, I have wire for mouse, wire for jkeyboard, I think my Oculus will have about 4 wires so more wires the better, but for other VR folks maybe less wires are a good thing.

as far as the 'mainstream' as far as I am concerned the 'mainstream' and its reality TV and suck it

Ridelynn

If I had the choice between two products, one wired and one wireless, and they perform equally and had similar prices, and battery wasn't a factor, I would go wireless every time.

But usually that isn't the case - performance, consistency, and battery life tend to get in the way.

phones are a good example of where I think they have overtaken their wired counterparts - not only cell phones but before that wireless 2.4Ghz wireless units had pretty much taken over - but it took a lot of years of phones before wireless became that prevelent. Keyboards I think wireless are pretty much as good as wired. But mice, I still prefer a wired mouse because of consistency - I haven't found one yet that doesn't hiccup a bit. For VR - no idea.

I do agree with the idea that having a more multipurpose device being able to do VR well would probably have better market penetration than a expensive dedicated device. 

SEANMCAD

I think one thing about this news now that I actually read the full OP ...HA!

Now that Gear VR has been out for about a year when including innovators edition I think if the Gear VR sales where at all disappointing that Samsung would not be doing this dedicated VR thingy. Something to add to the long list of 'data points' that seem to suggest VR is doing well and more importantly not a failure

Ridelynn

Yup. Samsung never makes something that flops. This is definitely a valid data point that indicates that VR is doing better than anyone's wildest dreams.

http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/445952/3d-is-officially-dead-samsung-stops-making-3d-tv

SEANMCAD

Ridelynn said:

Yup. Samsung never makes something that flops. This is definitely a valid data point that indicates that VR is doing better than anyone's wildest dreams.

http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/445952/3d-is-officially-dead-samsung-stops-making-3d-tv

make 1 product then a year later make a modified upscale version of that product

is not

the 3d story with samsung.

The key in what I said was..well..what I said and the reasons I gave for me saying it

maskedweasel

SEANMCAD said:

Ridelynn said:

Yup. Samsung never makes something that flops. This is definitely a valid data point that indicates that VR is doing better than anyone's wildest dreams.

http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/445952/3d-is-officially-dead-samsung-stops-making-3d-tv

make 1 product then a year later make a modified upscale version of that product

is not

the 3d story with samsung.

The key in what I said was..well..what I said and the reasons I gave for me saying it

No, samsung often makes missteps.  They are trying to boost VR sales... this is prevalent by giving their headset away with every Galaxy S7 they sold.  But people don't really want them - the Gear VR headsets.  A lot of people are selling them.  Those that wanted them would have already bought one.

It is quite similar with 3D in general - at least at this point.  A lot of companies spent money on 3D.. even nintendo came out with the 3DS where you didn't even need glasses for 3D and it still wasn't good enough.  3D eventually just faded away including the lack of support.


As for the Wires vs Wireless.  Wireless is always more comfortable and pretty much the best way to experience any type of mobile gaming.  I don't want to "walk around" in my room with a wire snagging on something or accidentally getting tangled up.. or having my dog run by and pull it off my head.

For people who are all alone and have no pets/kids/roommates/family with them,  I can see how a simple wired system in an empty room might make sense.

SEANMCAD

maskedweasel said:

SEANMCAD said:

Ridelynn said:

Yup. Samsung never makes something that flops. This is definitely a valid data point that indicates that VR is doing better than anyone's wildest dreams.

http://forums.mmorpg.com/discussion/445952/3d-is-officially-dead-samsung-stops-making-3d-tv

make 1 product then a year later make a modified upscale version of that product

is not

the 3d story with samsung.

The key in what I said was..well..what I said and the reasons I gave for me saying it

No, samsung often makes missteps.  They are trying to boost VR sales... this is prevalent by giving their headset away with every Galaxy S7 they sold.  But people don't really want them - the Gear VR headsets.  A lot of people are selling them.  Those that wanted them would have already bought one.

It is quite similar with 3D in general - at least at this point.  A lot of companies spent money on 3D.. even nintendo came out with the 3DS where you didn't even need glasses for 3D and it still wasn't good enough.  3D eventually just faded away including the lack of support.


As for the Wires vs Wireless.  Wireless is always more comfortable and pretty much the best way to experience any type of mobile gaming.  I don't want to "walk around" in my room with a wire snagging on something or accidentally getting tangled up.. or having my dog run by and pull it off my head.

For people who are all alone and have no pets/kids/roommates/family with them,  I can see how a simple wired system in an empty room might make sense.

read what I wrote painfully close. I put in () where I am adding additional explatation as to what I am saying:



----------------
I think one thing about this news now that I actually read the full OP ...HA!

Now that Gear VR has been out for about a year when including innovators edition I think if the Gear VR sales where at all disappointing that Samsung would not be doing this dedicated VR thingy. Something to add to the long list of 'data points' that seem to suggest VR is doing well and more importantly not a failure

(what I am suggesting is here is if a company sells something then a new modified upscale version of that same thing sold a year later likely would not happen if the first thing was a failure. What I am saying is is DEPENDENT on contray examples having a 'before' thingy and then a 'after' thingy. NOT a 'only one' thingy.

It is the pillar, the cornerstone, the most important, the meat and patatoes of what I am saying, why I said it and how I said it.)

maskedweasel

SEANMCAD said:

maskedweasel said:

SEANMCAD said:

----------------
I think one thing about this news now that I actually read the full OP ...HA!

Now that Gear VR has been out for about a year when including innovators edition I think if the Gear VR sales where at all disappointing that Samsung would not be doing this dedicated VR thingy. Something to add to the long list of 'data points' that seem to suggest VR is doing well and more importantly not a failure

(what I am suggesting is here is if a company sells something then a new modified upscale version of that same thing sold a year later likely would not happen if the first thing was a failure. What I am saying is is DEPENDENT on contray examples having a 'before' thingy and then a 'after' thingy. NOT a 'only one' thingy.

It is the pillar, the cornerstone, the most important, the meat and patatoes of what I am saying, why I said it and how I said it.)

You did read it though, right?  The article?  You did see where it said that Samsungs device looks to position it in direct competition with the Rift?  Possibly to the point where the Rift itself is marginalized as a software developer?  

It's basically the HTC Vive thing and the point I tried to mention over there. Samsung and HTC have doubled down on VR, not because it's profitable, but because it isn't.  

Lets migrate this to a conversation more easily understandable.  FFXIV.  When it first launched it was horrendous.. it had followers but very few.  It wasn't doing well.  Instead of scrapping the project they spent TWICE the money on it to try to make it successful.   It was somewhat successful to varying degrees at relaunch,  but that isn't the point.

The point is, when companies invest in something -- in samsungs case where they are literally giving sets away, but it isn't enough.  (like it's been said  using VR on the the s7 can do 85% of what the Rift can based on whats currently in the store for less than 50% of the price)  Samsung is going to double down on their set to make it wireless, in hopes that they can get to 100% of what the rift does - done better - for cheaper in hopes they will be crowned the VR king.

SEANMCAD

Torval said:

SEANMCAD said:

maskedweasel said:

No, samsung often makes missteps.  They are trying to boost VR sales... this is prevalent by giving their headset away with every Galaxy S7 they sold.  But people don't really want them - the Gear VR headsets.  A lot of people are selling them.  Those that wanted them would have already bought one.

It is quite similar with 3D in general - at least at this point.  A lot of companies spent money on 3D.. even nintendo came out with the 3DS where you didn't even need glasses for 3D and it still wasn't good enough.  3D eventually just faded away including the lack of support.


As for the Wires vs Wireless.  Wireless is always more comfortable and pretty much the best way to experience any type of mobile gaming.  I don't want to "walk around" in my room with a wire snagging on something or accidentally getting tangled up.. or having my dog run by and pull it off my head.

For people who are all alone and have no pets/kids/roommates/family with them,  I can see how a simple wired system in an empty room might make sense.

read what I wrote painfully close. I put in () where I am adding additional explatation as to what I am saying:
----------------
I think one thing about this news now that I actually read the full OP ...HA!

Now that Gear VR has been out for about a year when including innovators edition I think if the Gear VR sales where at all disappointing that Samsung would not be doing this dedicated VR thingy. Something to add to the long list of 'data points' that seem to suggest VR is doing well and more importantly not a failure

(what I am suggesting is here is if a company sells something then a new modified upscale version of that same thing sold a year later likely would not happen if the first thing was a failure. What I am saying is is DEPENDENT on contray examples having a 'before' thingy and then a 'after' thingy. NOT a 'only one' thingy.

It is the pillar, the cornerstone, the most important, the meat and patatoes of what I am saying, why I said it and how I said it.)

You're using bad logic in your argument. It's called jumping to the conclusion. You present a premise that can reasonably be true, but then because it sounds sensible to you, you assert that it's true without actually supporting your argument. Conjecture alone doesn't make a good supporting argument.

It's is very possible that the division within Samsung responsible for this technology has a specified amount of time and money to push the product to meet successful adoption.

my logic being bad and maskedweasel even coming remotely close to understanding what i said are two different things. If one understood what I said they would not use a ONE THNIGY as an example for a comeback but rather a ONE THINGY and then A NEW SECOND MODIFIED VERSION THINGY

SEANMCAD

maskedweasel said:

SEANMCAD said:

maskedweasel said:

SEANMCAD said:

----------------
I think one thing about this news now that I actually read the full OP ...HA!

Now that Gear VR has been out for about a year when including innovators edition I think if the Gear VR sales where at all disappointing that Samsung would not be doing this dedicated VR thingy. Something to add to the long list of 'data points' that seem to suggest VR is doing well and more importantly not a failure

(what I am suggesting is here is if a company sells something then a new modified upscale version of that same thing sold a year later likely would not happen if the first thing was a failure. What I am saying is is DEPENDENT on contray examples having a 'before' thingy and then a 'after' thingy. NOT a 'only one' thingy.

It is the pillar, the cornerstone, the most important, the meat and patatoes of what I am saying, why I said it and how I said it.)

You did read it though, right?  The article?  You did see where it said that Samsungs device looks to position it in direct competition with the Rift?  Possibly to the point where the Rift itself is marginalized as a software developer?  

.....

if in a years time the sales of a device were terrible do you think any CEO in their right mind would say 'yeah. VR makes sense given these horrible sales numbers so now lets make a device to compete with a VR headset that doesnt even have sales figures yet' come on!!!!!!!!

SEANMCAD

maskedweasel said:

here is what you are trying to suggest

'Mr. Samsung, I know our Gear VR has been for sale for about a year and its sold out twice but if you look at our numbers its clear our sales are fairly uninteresting or bad. Given that we are the first VR device on the market and that there doesnt exist any other retail sales figures other than ours this is why I suggest despite our bad sales we should take this as a clear indicator that people want VR and as a result sell a better version of this device to compete with Oculus and HTC who by the way do not have any sells numbers'

I am saying

'it appears the sales are good and they are optimistic about moving forward'

maskedweasel

SEANMCAD said:

maskedweasel said:

here is what you are trying to suggest

'Mr. Samsung, I know our Gear VR has been for sale for about a year and its sold out twice but if you look at our numbers its clear our sales are fairly uninteresting or bad. Given that we are the first VR device on the market and that there doesnt exist any other retail sales figures other than ours this is why I suggest despite our bad sales we should take this as a clear indicator that people want VR and as a result sell a better version of this device to compete with Oculus and HTC who by the way do not have any sells numbers'

I am saying

'it appears the sales are good and they are optimistic about moving forward'

 But... they aren't good... and they aren't optimistically moving forward.  They are moving forward in hopes to seek adoption to become profitable.

It's like saying.. "WOW WE'RE DOING SO GOOD WE CAN JUST GIVE THESE HEADSETS AWAY NOW!"  That's never the case.

Just like HTC is saying "We're making SO MUCH MONEY on the Vive lets PAY PEOPLE to give us content because we're not getting content fast enough FOR HOW MUCH MONEY WE'RE MAKING"

If HTC was making money and the Vive had wide adoption.. do you think they would spend money?

If Samsung was making tons of money on their VR systems currently in place (which, technically they are making money on the VR "systems" because the S7 is a cell phone and their first flagship phone of 2016 which  will always sell well, but people aren't buying it for VR as is seen by the tremendous amount of brand new in box "used" Gear VR sales out there now)

We're currently in the Marketing Structure Interim of Technology Adoption for VR.  This is the grace period where you figure out if it will succeed or if it will faulter.  They are putting more money in to increase the potential of adoption.  

This is Samsungs move to overtake Oculus Rift --  they're hedging a bet that if they create the better hardware, for less money, that they can make their VR investment profitable.    They aren't doing it because its so profitable now that they are creating an "upgrade".  They are trying to dominate the market as the ONLY real profitable choice.

SEANMCAD

maskedweasel said:

Here is what John Carmack said about Samsung. Its not a quote but close

 'Samsung decided to go ahead with VR with an 'innovators edition' to test out the market to see how customers responded and if positive then they would consider a full retail'

 yeah...not exactly a stretch what I am suggesting here

Here is a little test. 
What am I suggesting? lets see if get the answer right

maskedweasel

SEANMCAD said:

maskedweasel said:

Here is what John Carmack said about Samsung. Its not a quote but close

 'Samsung decided to go ahead with VR with an 'innovators edition' to test out the market to see how customers responded and if positive then they would consider a full retail'

 yeah...not exactly a stretch what I am suggesting here

Here is a little test. 
What am I suggesting? lets see if get the answer right

Links.

Octagon7711

The market is in development.  More players will experience VR through a cellphone then going out and buying a decent VR headset unit.  They already have the cellphone and just have to install some software.  Also they don't have to buy a high end computer or upgrade their mid-range computer.  If you already have a PS4 or Xbox they would probably more likely to try it out also then pc users.
Using Android to VR pc games.

SEANMCAD

maskedweasel said:

SEANMCAD said:

maskedweasel said:

Here is what John Carmack said about Samsung. Its not a quote but close

 'Samsung decided to go ahead with VR with an 'innovators edition' to test out the market to see how customers responded and if positive then they would consider a full retail'

 yeah...not exactly a stretch what I am suggesting here

Here is a little test. 
What am I suggesting? lets see if get the answer right

Links.

it was a 90 min or so interview with Joh Carmak I saw on youtube over a year ago. unfortunately I dont recall WHICH event it was. Do you think I am liying or mistaken on this fairly simple point?

I mean I know testing out an unprooven new market with something called an 'innovators edition' to see if the market responds positive before going full retail is crazy talk but it does happen from time to time