2016 nMP

[Mago]

VR in fact is the next "input device". It is much, much more than anyone can imagine right now. It IS everything.

VR has been around since early 90s, the difference now is the much hype pushed on VR headset, industry is hurry on a next big thing:..

PC industry feeded nasdaq a long time being the greatest big thing ever, until it commoditized.

The original Web failed miserably and giving us that dot com market Crack wich ruined the economy, then

HDTV helped for a while.

3D HDTV failed miserable

Social networks now are an hyper commodity also Facebook has serious issues to profit.

4k failed and is lowering price sooner that have been foresee, and soon 4k will be as cheap as hd.

Blu Ray 4k is dead before getting to the market

Smart tv, becomes quickly another media commodity.

The entertainment industry looks for the new "CD" like or smartphone like product giving high revenue margins and slowly getting cheaper (here is where patents came to play).

Now many people think VR is the next silver bullet big thing, I doubt VR will pass around as another gaming gadgets as PSP or a game console, I don't see a future of VR - everything, what VR will do is to replace large video display on entertainment rooms and somewhat will be another companion device on some desktops,but I doubt seriously it will be the next big thing as was the smartphone (soon to commoditize) or the CD which lasted long time before become commodity products.

VR what actually gives you is an bit more immersive experience but not always this is as practical or necessary on a daily work flow, just as the smartphone is now part of our lives.

 

[tuxon86]

Beyond entertainment, other VR applications are very niche markets usually high vertical I doubt Apple is interested on these markets and will put its strength on a Mac based VR, o don't deny Apple will show some support at least for a device like HTC Vibe but don't hope it to be mainstream on Apple, as I said Apple VR will be focused arround some portable device based on iOS either having a Google cardboard like setup or with an dedicated headset with dual screens one for each eye, also a flat 3d screen mounted in something like Google cardboard w/o any lenses.

the MP and workstations in general are used in many field beside media creation. I canm see apple passing on the iMac or macbook VR kit, but it would be stupid to alienate even more it's pro market.
[doublepost=1458142824][/doublepost]

VR has been around since early 90s, the difference now is the much hype pushed on VR headset, industry is hurry on a next big thing:..

PC industry feeded nasdaq a long time being the greatest big thing ever, until it commoditized.

The original Web failed miserably and giving us that dot com market Crack wich ruined the economy, then

HDTV helped for a while.

3D HDTV failed miserable

Social networks now are an hyper commodity also Facebook has serious issues to profit.

4k failed and is lowering price sooner that have been foresee, and soon 4k will be as cheap as hd.

Blu Ray 4k is dead before getting to the market

Smart tv, becomes quickly another media commodity.

The entertainment industry looks for the new "CD" like or smartphone like product giving high revenue margins and slowly getting cheaper (here is where patents came to play).

Now many people think VR is the next silver bullet big thing, I doubt VR will pass around as another gaming gadgets as PSP or a game console, I don't see a future of VR - everything, what VR will do is to replace large video display on entertainment rooms and somewhat will be another companion device on some desktops,but I doubt seriously it will be the next big thing as was the smartphone (soon to commoditize) or the CD which lasted long time before become commodity products.

VR what actually gives you is an bit more immersive experience but not always this is as practical or necessary on a daily work flow, just as the smartphone is now part of our lives.

Yes it has been around since the 90's (I worked on such an early system), but there was no hardware able to push the content at an acceptable framerate and resolution to make it viable then. Today's modern GPU can sustain the workload needed to make it applicable in many, many fields.

 

[Zarniwoop]

VR has been around since early 90s, the difference now is the much hype pushed on VR headset, industry is hurry on a next big thing:..

I see more potential in AR & VR combination. VR can be a bit more dangerous, because you might not be aware what is happening around you.

Some examples of different scenarios

Just imagine the next Ikea catalogue, where you are standing in your living room, and it starts to fill with new furnitures and you can realize immediately how they look and fit in your apartment without taking any measurement.. how would a new wallpaper or paint look like.

A car repairman, who finds the faulty part just looking at the car.. its pointing there.

You are fixing your bike and there is an experienced friend next to you.

A school that you can attend from your home and still be in the classroom with real teacher.

Skype meeting with all your colleges around the world. You all are in the same "office room".

No need to buy a tv or projector.. or to have a place for them. Even the old fashion 2D shows can be seen anywhere you want. You want a tv on that wall, and its there.

We are living in the world of individualism (at least in western countries). VR will be their drug. Before we invent the Matrix...

 

[Mago]

I see more potential in AR & VR combination. VR can be a bit more dangerous, because you might not be aware what is happening around you.

Some examples of different scenarios

Just imagine the next Ikea catalogue, where you are standing in your living room, and it starts to fill with new furnitures and you can realize immediately how they look and fit in your apartment without taking any measurement.. how would a new wallpaper or paint look like.

A car repairman, who finds the faulty part just looking at the car.. its pointing there.

You are fixing your bike and there is an experienced friend next to you.

A school that you can attend from your home and still be in the classroom with real teacher.

Skype meeting with all your colleges around the world. You all are in the same "office room".

No need to buy a tv or projector.. or to have a place for them. Even the old fashion 2D shows can be seen anywhere you want. You want a tv on that wall, and its there.

We are living it the world of individualism (at least in western countries). VR will be their drug. Before we invent the Matrix...

Tablets also supposedly would do as many things, promised a lot, but then commoditized.

And while everybody now has an tablet few use it to watch movies or read large books or magazines, the tablet is just a laptop w/o keyboard, as a VR/AR setup it's just a display tied to our heads.

VR proposal as this VR ikea catalog aren't new, I first saw this early 90s also people offered virtual repair manual or mx support (aerospace industry bit this bait for a while) then VR was monocular from what you can do isn't too different unless you want immersion and 3d experience.

Seriously VR/AR are over hyped.

 

[ManuelGomes]

Stacc, Broadwell-EP was not supposed to come out in June but Q1, two weeks left.

GPU solutions based on Polaris seem almost certain, but I'm not sure Polaris 11 for D310 would be good enough, maybe it is. Polaris 10 would be perfect, a cut down version and a full fat.

Thing is, all seems to be slipping a lot in time.

 

[fuchsdh]

I think about VR the same way I think about pretty much all technological "revolutions" people promise—why buy in? If I wait I get something better for cheaper and with the kinks worked out, and where there is wide support for the tech. Novelty doesn't sell me on the thousands I'd need for an Oculus.

Companies don't have the luxury of wait-and-see, but consumers absolutely do, and we also have the ability to just say "hell no" to encroachment of tech where it's not useful or necessary—the smart home stuff is going to take a long time to take off, even with everyone trying to push it.

 

[ManuelGomes]

[doublepost=1458144819][/doublepost]

 

[Mago]

Yes it has been around since the 90's (I worked on such an early system), but there was no hardware able to push the content at an acceptable framerate and resolution to make it viable then. Today's modern GPU can sustain the workload needed to make it applicable in many, many fields.

thats not right, VR ever required just 2x (also less, since some background and elements are a common rendering and some others dont need an actual 3D rendering some can be derivate from 1st field rendering) the desired Graphic Processing power, you are alienated by Occulus Rift proposal which is AIMED to push NEW HARDWARE PURCHASES, so they require this because they want to start from the Top Tier Enthusiast Segment of the Gaming Industry, BUT ACTUALLY YOU DONT NEED AS MUCH GPU IF YU ONLY WANT SIMPLER RENDERING as on current smartphone you dont need a Monster GPU, as much 2x and you get the same graphic quality.

So VR could happen a decade Ago, what actually pushed VR isnt the GPU's advance, but the DISPLAY PANELS, now its easy to build a light Color Stereo VR headset with the same angular resolution as on a Desktop Display, and at a near commodity cost.

That is what pushed VR, not the GPU advance.

 

[Zarniwoop]

If VR is done right. It seems that the creative forces are together with engineers (and not with the marketing dept., that leads usually to no good). It's a good sign.

4k have lacked HDMI 2.0 and content. So fail. But it still has its change. UHD BluRays are just coming and we have HDMI 2.0 now everywhere. 3D TV content is often poorly made and cheap tvs broke the illusion easy. But 3D really is just an effect that has no higher purpose. Fail.

VR / AR is just not an effect. It can be very useful tool. It can be an immersive experience, a Disneland at home. Second gen could bring a leather seat that can rotate (like a simulator) that will give the feeling of movement.

 

[Stacc]

[doublepost=1458144819][/doublepost]

There is a difference between motherboard and platform support and actual shipping processors. I believe motherboards with the X99 chipset are starting to get updates to support Broadwell-E/EP. Leaked processor roadmaps from 4 months ago show a Q2 release for Broadwell E.

Relax, Broadwell will be released in due time and I doubt it matters that much since Apple will likely wait on AMD Polaris availability anyways.

 

[Mago]

Please return to the nnMP theme.

 

[ManuelGomes]

Broadwell-E is not Xeon, it's HEDT.

 

[tuxon86]

thats not right, VR ever required just 2x (also less, since some background and elements are a common rendering and some others dont need an actual 3D rendering some can be derivate from 1st field rendering) the desired Graphic Processing power, you are alienated by Occulus Rift proposal which is AIMED to push NEW HARDWARE PURCHASES, so they require this because they want to start from the Top Tier Enthusiast Segment of the Gaming Industry, BUT ACTUALLY YOU DONT NEED AS MUCH GPU IF YU ONLY WANT SIMPLER RENDERING as on current smartphone you dont need a Monster GPU, as much 2x and you get the same graphic quality.

So VR could happen a decade Ago, what actually pushed VR isnt the GPU's advance, but the DISPLAY PANELS, now its easy to build a light Color Stereo VR headset with the same angular resolution as on a Desktop Display, and at a near commodity cost.

That is what pushed VR, not the GPU advance.

If by VR you are only considering displaying filled cubes and pyramids then yes 90's VR did work. What we are talking here is high resolution, photorealistic & high resolution/high framerates VR. Not the same thing.

 

[Stacc]

Broadwell-E is not Xeon, it's HEDT.

Yes, but typically Xeons are divided into small, medium and large dies. The small die is basically used for low core count xeons (6-10 core) and HEDT. They share almost all the same features.

 

[tomvos]

If by VR you are only considering displaying filled cubes and pyramids then yes 90's VR did work. What we are talking here is high resolution, photorealistic & high resolution/high framerates VR. Not the same thing.

We are still miles away from photorealistic 3D. We are not even close to the uncanny valley yet. Talking about photorealism and actually reaching photorealism (in 60 fps or better) are two different things. VR/AR will be interesting for some fields. But I doubt it will be the game changing technology some believe it to be.

 

[ManuelGomes]

Not being picky here but HEDT usually even have different launch schedules, as is the case here, although they are based on mostly the same silicon. Not important really, I was just imagining a new delay.
Still, as you say, that wouldn't really be a problem at the moment since Polaris is still not out.

 

[Mago]

If by VR you are only considering displaying filled cubes and pyramids then yes 90's VR did work. What we are talking here is high resolution, photorealistic & high resolution/high framerates VR. Not the same thing.

This is like to say that you didn't really game in 3D landscape because your gpu didn't support 4Kbit textures...

Or that mobile gaming isn't 3D gaming because you can't have 4k or 120fps

Cmon...

That's the argument by oculus to rise the hardware bar in behalf the pc industry, not actually an VR commandment.

VR is not the quality it's just immersion you can have am smartphone like gaming experience or an desktop pc gaming experience in VR environment, the bar is raised so high just to cherish hardware industry.

Did you ever tried a Google cardboard or samsung gear VR?

What's it's more demanding on VR environment is display 360 degree video because the data stream is squared in comparison to std 3d video, not the same on gaming if you want to experience some game you don't need more hardware than that you needed for an 3D tv notwithstanding you can be immersed in a 360 environment.

 

[tuxon86]

We are still miles away from photorealistic 3D. We are not even close to the uncanny valley yet. Talking about photorealism and actually reaching photorealism (in 60 fps or better) are two different things. VR/AR will be interesting for some fields. But I doubt it will be the game changing technology some believe it to be.

We are getting there... That's the point. And in many field what we have today is quite close enough.
It is game changing in the same way that stereo sound reproduction was over mono. Both delivered the same information but one gave you more possibilities and applications.
[doublepost=1458148767][/doublepost]

This is like to say that you didn't really game in 3D landscape because your gpu didn't support 4Kbit textures...

Or that mobile gaming isn't 3D gaming because you can't have 4k or 120fps

Cmon...

That's the argument by oculus to rise the hardware bar in behalf the pc industry, not actually an VR commandment.

VR is not the quality it's just immersion you can have am smartphone like gaming experience or an desktop pc gaming experience in VR environment, the bar is raised so high just to cherish hardware industry.

Did you ever tried a Google cardboard or samsung gear VR?

What's it's more demanding on VR environment is display 360 degree video because the data stream is squared in comparison to std 3d video, not the same on gaming if you want to experience some game you don't need more hardware than that you needed for an 3D tv notwithstanding you can be immersed in a 360 environment.

3D on a display screen is in fact 2D. You render your scene in 3D but the resulting image displayed on your screen is 2D.
Make this simple test: Create a 3D box on your monitor and without rotating it try to see what is hiden behind it. With VR I can "move" behind the box and look at what is there. I'm the one moving, not the scene. Can't do that on a monitor.

 

[dpny]

WWDC is a developer conference.

Good point.

 

[koyoot]

http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1329217

The foundry taped out last month a 16FF+ device merging a CPU and two HBM2 memory stacks on a silicon interposer to pave the way for its 7nm offering.

Isn't Apple supposed to use 16 nm FF+ from TSMC to build their A10 and A10X?

 

[Mago]

We are getting there... That's the point. And in many field what we have today is quite close enough.
It is game changing in the same way that stereo sound reproduction was over mono. Both delivered the same information but one gave you more possibilities and applications.
[doublepost=1458148767][/doublepost]

3D on a display screen is in fact 2D. You render your scene in 3D but the resulting image displayed on your screen is 2D.
Make this simple test: Create a 3D box on your monitor and without rotating it try to see what is hiden behind it. With VR I can "move" behind the box and look at what is there. I'm the one moving, not the scene. Can't do that on a monitor.

VR is stereo vision with Dynamic POV, it's exactly what is just to move an HDTV 3D movie Following your head movement and having the display attached to your head, still used 2 2D flat screens, VR is not the same as a hologram which needs to display complete.

VR doesn't mean you need to fill the entire 3D space with pixels (1024x1024x1024) you only need to fill the POV stereo image for such 3D space.

In fact if you want to migrate an 3D game or 3d application to VR you Don't need change 3d models, neither you need to duplicate data sent to the gpu, the same data you use on a game to render a 3D scene on a flat 3D screen is the same data you need to render the same scene on VR glasses, what's change on a flat fixed 3d display is that you don't change your POV.

3D movies supposedly will change Hollywood industry, that never happened and there was 4 waves of 3D movies, first on the 50s was on anaglyph display using red blue colored lenses, then later in the 80 it come back with polarized glasses, didn't work, then mid 2000 it come back on HDTV and then to the theater again (by drag not because was already planned due some improvement on the projection) and then 3D movies again tend to dissappear and keep as an niche for fx loaded movies, also most people prefer 2D since avoid headaches and distract less on the important parts of the scene.

Stereo audio become mandatory only for music application otherwise is optional.

Not the same case or fate for VR content, VR 360 video will never become the norm as 3D video certainly isn't, just am option for where is needed.

Where VR has more chance is on gaming and virtual training, for gamers immersion is a must for a rich experience the same for training having a full 3d environment w/o need to build an entire simulator not only provides a more realistic experience but lowers cost considerably. Basically those are the VR niche, neither 360 VR video has some chance to become popular to me the next norm for shooting video.

And for VR experience as the virtual ikea furniture room, this isn't new, early in 90s 360vr video of car cabins become popular, and still are available at some brands sites but neither become a norm it's popularity decreased because the people (and advertisers) focused on other things.

 

[Mago]

http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1329217

Isn't Apple supposed to use 16 nm FF+ from TSMC to build their A10 and A10X?

It's a shame AMD don't have it's own foundries as Intel and Samsung.

 

[tuxon86]

VR is stereo vision with Dynamic POV, it's exactly what is just to move an HDTV 3D movie Following your head movement and having the display attached to your head, still used 2 2D flat screens, VR is not the same as a hologram which needs to display complete.

VR doesn't mean you need to fill the entire 3D space with pixels (1024x1024x1024) you only need to fill the POV stereo image for such 3D space.

In fact if you want to migrate an 3D game or 3d application to VR you Don't need change 3d models, neither you need to duplicate data sent to the gpu, the same data you use on a game to render a 3D scene on a flat 3D screen is the same data you need to render the same scene on VR glasses, what's change on a flat fixed 3d display is that you don't change your POV.

3D movies supposedly will change Hollywood industry, that never happened and there was 4 waves of 3D movies, first on the 50s was on anaglyph display using red blue colored lenses, then later in the 80 it come back with polarized glasses, didn't work, then mid 2000 it come back on HDTV and then to the theater again (by drag not because was already planned due some improvement on the projection) and then 3D movies again tend to dissappear and keep as an niche for fx loaded movies, also most people prefer 2D since avoid headaches and distract less on the important parts of the scene.

Stereo audio become mandatory only for music application otherwise is optional.

Not the same case or fate for VR content, VR 360 video will never become the norm as 3D video certainly isn't, just am option for where is needed.

Where VR has more chance is on gaming and virtual training, for gamers immersion is a must for a rich experience the same for training having a full 3d environment w/o need to build an entire simulator not only provides a more realistic experience but lowers cost considerably. Basically those are the VR niche, neither 360 VR video has some chance to become popular to me the next norm for shooting video.

And for VR experience as the virtual ikea furniture room, this isn't new, early in 90s 360vr video of car cabins become popular, and still are available at some brands sites but neither become a norm it's popularity decreased because the people (and advertisers) focused on other things.

Man, we are using VR at work presently, so don't tell me what it can or cannot do...
We are using stereoscopic camera to record powerline, and power station inside or out. VR scene are created from those. Those are then used by engineer when doing refection on said equipment in VR PRESENTLY! Being able to see the equipment in place and in scale without having to fly to the location is really great.

I get it that you don't get the benefit of VR in your life, mostly because you seem stuck on the videogame schtick while I keep telling you that it isn't just a gaming thing. You don't like it then don't buy it but please stop with your nonsense.
And at what amount of $$$ do you stop considering something niche? We also employ hich capacity monster dump truck and giant earth movers when we are building dam all over the world... Since the company who make them only sell a few per years does that mean that it is niche and so has no utility what so ever? Because you personnaly don't have a need for it?

Come on...

 

[t0mat0]

"The holodeck is a long way off"

http://www.polygon.com/2016/3/15/11241858/oculus-story-studio-max-planck-gdc-2016

 

[Mago]

Man, we are using VR at work presently, so don't tell me what it can or cannot do...
We are using stereoscopic camera to record powerline, and power station inside or out. VR scene are created from those. Those are then used by engineer when doing refection on said equipment in VR PRESENTLY! Being able to see the equipment in place and in scale without having to fly to the location is really great.

I get it that you don't get the benefit of VR in your life, mostly because you seem stuck on the videogame schtick while I keep telling you that it isn't just a gaming thing. You don't like it then don't buy it but please stop with your nonsense.
And at what amount of $$$ do you stop considering something niche? We also employ hich capacity monster dump truck and giant earth movers when we are building dam all over the world... Since the company who make them only sell a few per years does that mean that it is niche and so has no utility what so ever? Because you personnaly don't have a need for it?

Come on...

That's not VR properly, it's telepresence, and stereo vision it's optional and depends more on bandwidth than graphics processing, neither you record the entire 360 scene, I'll name it instead Stereo vision telepresence.