SimulaVR Blog

> GNOME is ahead of them because of the progress on high dynamic range color, non-fullscreen/partial scanouts, variable refresh rates, and the hidden work in GNOME extensions enabling things like PaperWM.

Wait... all of this is a lot to take in. HDR progress has gone great on Red Hat's side, but KDE has been working on it just as long (with arguably further progress). VRR has existed on KDE for a while as "Adaptive Sync" and the work that goes into updating GNOME extensions exists mostly because the GNOME developers refuse to make a stable API for it.

GNOME and Red Hat obviously do great work for the community, but these seem like weird examples. To the contrary, with GNOME's fractured extensibility and now-missing system tray, a lot of Windows and MacOS users will probably feel confused booting up GNOME 40. I say all this from a GNOME system myself =P

> Once both DEs support these things, we can then recognize we're so far behind the curve with "spatial computing"

Holy whiplash, Batman! I disagree so hard my head is spinning.

For one, "the curve" of Spatial Computing is so-far relegated to cheap Android SDKs and $3,500 iPad-killers. Nobody is shipping Johnny-Mnemonic style hardware today, and probably won't be for another decade. Focusing on developing that technology is not only a waste of time, but entirely tangential to the work that goes into making the modern desktop usable. GNOME and KDE's efforts shouldn't be dedicated to a hypothetical userbase that might never…

Disagree, I think this is not a good read on Apple strategy and you may be heeding the wrong lessons in computing history.

1. The passive vs active framing applies primarily to non-Pro iPads. I don't think it can be reasonably argued the $3k Vision Pro is attempting to cannibalize low end iPads. iPad Pros are very different beasts that are designed for a particular type of creative output, and are very capable general purpose computing devices now.

2. There's no particular incentive to cannibalize iPad over Mac, its hard to fathom what dimension that makes sense on. They're happy to cannibalize any product, but their main MO is 'look what cool shit we can do with the latest tech' and Vision Pro is today's version of that. Apple is demonstrably way more interested in building out iOS/iPadOS and we've seen that over the past 10 years, to the point Mac users had to basically revolt to get attention.

3. Of course Vision Pro is based on iPad ecosystem, as its a far more modern set of conventions better suited to mixed modal input than Mac. That isn't a reflection of VP's purpose, but of engineering and design realities - it's far easier to grow iPad/iOS into a top tier spatial computing OS and ecosystem.

While MacOS is wonderful, it's really a product of a particular conception of computing, and shoehorning a 40 year old desktop OS paradigm into entirely new input modalities and ergonomic contexts makes little sense. The puck isn't going anywhere new, the desktop OS modality…

For years I haven't been excited by anything in the VR space. I tried them, even with the running apparatus and the slippery shoes, and it was fun. But that's it.

Nor the Leap, the Quest or the Hololens interest me very much. It doesn't bring much into my life, but promise to take a lot from it. Besides, the fact it's backed by companies with a not so good track record at respecting their users, and some of them, at making closed proprietary platforms, doesn't make me want to dive in.

But recently, 2 projects started to get me excited:

- the Tilt 5: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fzr-IeyWj40

- the Simula: https://simulavr.com/

They are both trying to be very good at a very specific use case, which I think is a better way to approach the problem right now since we don't have VR solved. The vibes their creators give is also much more human, in an "internet from the 90" kind of way.

The Tilt 5 already works well, and people using it all report that it's the best VR experience they had to date. They also make it easy to port games from existing platforms, and actually talk to communities such as war-hammer 40k players and board game lovers, instead of staying in their ivory tower wrapped in secret to finally come down as our lord and savior. Plus I love board games.

The Simula is only a concept, and it may very well end up being vaporware like many kickstarter projects. But I want it to succeed so badly. First, it's just linux. No proprietary platform BS. It tells me it…

TLDR:

I found things, yes. But they weren’t a fit for me.

Things I found:

### SimulaVR [1]

A linux native VR headset with an entire open ecosystem of software. On the plus side: they actually have an open source VR native window manager!!! Cons include: The hardware hasn’t shipped yet. The hardware is already multiple generations behind. (11th gen intel NUC). For productivity – I think video pass-through is essential. Which both this and the Aero lack. Tragically, the software stack for developed by Simula is not compatible with the Aero. Because the Simula Window Manager is linux native, and the Aero is Windows Native… (damn, I bought the wrong hardware.)

### Immersed [2]

This is a software solution that basically lets you remote into a desktop running an appropriate server to sling pixels at your VR headset. It’s heavily oriented towards FB headsets. The Aero isn’t supported. So I’ve never tried it. Also, it’s required that you are serving up actual screen pixels… so If you want to run headless there are wierd display port dongle hacks…

### UltraTerm / CyberGem

There is a developer that has a terminal running in the unreal game engine. In this case you can essentially design a level that is your workspace… It feels weird to even be talking about this, but if you just want linux terminals in VR… this can get you there in a very unique way. I have to say there’s a part of me that’s super into the idea of designing a virtual scene with embedded…

I believe I'll be able to replace my monitors to do my desk job with a VR headset within 10 years. Rather than having 2 monitors of different sizes and resolutions on a desk, why not just have as many virtual monitors with exactly the size, position, and distance I want? In fact, why have monitors at all? Just position the windows in arbitrary space in front of me.

Desktop computing with a VR headset is somewhat possible right now, but I am not quite able to stomach the resolution limitations of the Quest 2. I'm looking forward to devices like SimulaVR [0], which intend to fully replace desktop computing with a self-contained VR headset (plus a mouse and keyboard).

In my mind, there are two and a half problems to solve to make it possible. One is pixel density. It has to at least be equivalent (or very close) to our own eyes. Two is comfort, both physical (ventilation, weight) and health-wise (eye strain). Two and a half is being able to navigate without a mouse and keyboard, and preferably no peripherals, but I think I'm able to wait for that.

[0] https://simulavr.com/

SimulaVR [1] is introducing a new class of products (virtual reality computer or VRC) that aims to develop a full linux desktop in a headset. I'm excited about using this with Stardust XR [2] and my NixOS configuration.

We're obviously in a very early stage of consumer VR hardware and I agree with most people that AR (passthrough or glasses) would be preferable to VR. There are a lot of open problems in this space - a lot of these problems spoil the user experience, right now. But, engineers are solving them slowly over time and I don't predict a future (say 50 years from now) where people are still using their fingers to peck at keys and are still stuck with a 25" monitor (at least in the majority of cases).

Happy to be an early adopter - maybe I'll even discover some problems that I can solve and benefit from the inevitable deluge of capital.

[1]: https://simulavr.com/
[2]: https://stardustxr.org/