Vive Focus is a product that lags significantly behind its competitors. On Tuesday, November 14th, HTC hosted the Vive Developer Summit and introduced the Vive Focus, a VR headset built on the Qualcomm VRDK solution. Thanks to HTC's investments in the VR industry over the past three years, the Vive Focus has received considerable support from its partners.
However, there are also many critical voices, mostly from non-participants in the ecosystem. These opinions deserve attention. From my perspective, the Vive Focus is still a disappointing product. The main issues include:
HTC partnered with Google and Qualcomm in May and July of this year to release the Daydream All-in-One and the Chinese version of the Vive All-in-One, promising availability before the end of the year. Instead, the HTC Daydream All-in-One was abandoned, and the Vive Focus, based on Qualcomm’s VRDK, was launched. Initially expected to be a consumer version, it was actually released as a limited developer edition. If you were lucky enough to get a priority purchase voucher, you might have been satisfied. Otherwise, it's clear why this product may not meet expectations.
The Vive Focus comes with a 3DoF controller. Although Vive Wave supports integration of 6DoF controllers, they haven’t been released yet. There are no standout features on the hardware side either.
Based on the current market situation, I believe the Vive Focus is a backward product that highlights the confusion and shortcomings within the HTC Vive team. In the following sections, I will elaborate, but this article focuses solely on the Vive Focus itself.
The Vive Focus is based on Qualcomm’s VRDK solution, utilizing Qualcomm’s inside-out tracking technology (supporting 6DoF head tracking) and a 3DoF controller.
At the International Virtual Reality Innovation Conference in November, I categorized VR headsets into high-end, mid-range, and low-end. At the time, I considered mid-range to be devices with integrated computing components and inside-out tracking, like the Oculus Santa Cruz. Now, I think that classification needs updating. With the current development trends, mid-range VR headsets should also support 6DoF motion controllers with inside-out tracking.
**Technical Disadvantage**
In the early days, 3DoF controllers represented a technological breakthrough. However, their development has since become a disadvantage. Today, mid-range VR headsets should feature 6DoF motion controllers with inside-out position tracking.
The earliest known 3DoF controller was Google’s Daydream controller. At CES this January, I experienced both Google’s and Huawei’s Daydream controllers, which left a very poor impression. Despite the popularity of AR-VR at the event, the experience wasn't impressive. At the November conference, I again tried the Daydream controller and found it just as unsatisfactory. My overall feeling is that 3DoF controllers suffer from noticeable offset issues during use, which can quickly break immersion.
Compared to 3DoF controllers, 6DoF ones are more accurate and sensitive, using a position tracking system. It's worth noting that the 3DoF controllers on the Vive Focus do not rely on the inside-out tracking system. Anyone who has used the HTC Vive 6DoF controller or the Oculus Touch 6DoF motion controller understands the difference.
So, what can you achieve with a 3DoF controller paired with inside-out tracking?
In the current stage of VR development, products combining inside-out tracking with 3DoF controllers are misleading—more than enough. They should target the Oculus Santa Cruz, which features 6DoF motion controllers. However, these devices are only suitable for "watching" experiences like the Oculus Go, lacking the precision needed for interactive VR. This results in a frustrating user experience. Compared to low-end devices like Gear VR, inside-out tracking + 3DoF controllers offer more freedom but at a higher price. Who really wants to watch a movie while walking around in VR?
It's also worth noting that HTC mentioned at the conference that Daydream and Gear VR content could be ported to Vive Focus via Vive Wave. This suggests that the Vive Focus is positioned against the Oculus Go. It doesn’t rule out compatibility with the Santa Cruz, but it still lacks the necessary features.
**Time Disadvantage**
For early and low-end VR products, 3DoF controllers are understandable. However, 6DoF controllers are now the trend for mid-range VR headsets. In 2018, we’ll see more 6DoF controllers in the all-in-one market. Yet, the consumer version of Vive Focus with 3DoF remains unclear. After the release of Vive Focus on the 14th, some developers speculated that the developer version might be similar to the HTC Vive, with a consumer version possibly taking a year to launch. As of now, the only information available is that the handles would be available by mid-2018.
At the Oculus Connect 4 conference in October, Oculus launched the Oculus Go, a low-end all-in-one, and showcased the Santa Cruz, a mid-range device. The Santa Cruz also featured the latest Oculus Touch 6DoF motion controllers. Both the Santa Cruz Developer Edition and the Oculus Go Consumer Edition are planned for release in early 2018.
Compared to the competition, the Vive Focus Developer Edition is only a quarter ahead of the Santa Cruz Developer Edition, but it is technically far behind. The consumer version of Vive Focus has no release timeline, while the Oculus Go is set for Q1 2018.
**Content Disadvantage**
Thanks to partners like Valve, HTC Vive currently has over 2,000 VR apps on Steam, and Viveport has expanded to over 1,000 titles. However, in mobile VR, HTC is starting from scratch, which is a major disadvantage compared to Oculus. According to Xiao Bian’s statistics, the Oculus Store already has over 1,000 Gear VR-compatible apps, while Vive Focus is just beginning.
It's also worth noting that Oculus has developed over 1,000 VR apps in two years, and HTC Viveport has over 1,000 PC VR apps in the same period. Modeling analysis shows that VR content development has been linear, and no significant spikes are expected in the next two years. This suggests that developing 1,000 high-quality Gear VR apps will be extremely challenging for Vive Focus.
**Developer Disadvantage**
For mobile VR developers, it’s natural to prioritize platforms. Among many options, including Vive Focus, developers must evaluate Google Daydream, Oculus Santa Cruz, and Oculus Go (Gear VR).
Compared to the mid-range VR all-in-one market, both Oculus and HTC need to build new consumer bases. For developers, the key is which platform can grow faster. This involves considering each product’s technology, content volume, and pricing.
Currently, Oculus Go is priced at $200, the Oculus Rift at $400, and the Santa Cruz at around $300. What about Vive Focus? Though HTC hasn’t announced the price, it’s likely around $400. Since Oculus can sell at a loss, HTC, which has lost money for nine consecutive quarters, must cover costs.
Oculus can invite developers to adapt content from the Rift for Santa Cruz. HTC can do the same for Vive Focus. However, Santa Cruz is moving from 6DoF to 6DoF, while Vive Focus is going from 6DoF to 3DoF. Such adaptations require redesigning interactions, which means more work and fewer transplanted apps.
In the low-end VR market, HTC needs to build a user base from scratch, while Oculus already has 5 million Gear VR users (who also use Oculus Go content). Reports from IDC and SuperData indicate at least 6 million Gear VR users so far. HTC announced partnerships with several manufacturers at the conference, aiming to adapt its mobile VR content to their devices. But the total volume may not exceed 100,000.
Beyond hardware, Oculus already has over 1,000 Gear VR apps that HTC can’t match. These are also compatible with the Oculus Go. To expand content, HTC hopes to help developers port Daydream or Gear VR content to Vive Focus via Vive Wave. However, Daydream has only 100 apps after a year, showing slow growth. Why haven’t developers moved their content to Daydream? And what will HTC offer to convince them to move to Vive Focus? We’ll have to wait and see.
Looking at pricing again, Oculus Go costs just $200. Whether it’s Oculus Go or Santa Cruz, Vive Focus won’t have a price advantage, as HTC needs to make a profit.
If you’re a mobile VR developer deciding between Oculus or Vive, which platform is better under such clear contrasts? Of course, if HTC offers big money, you’d be lucky.
**Conclusion**
As early as 2016, HTC said it was considering mobile VR hardware. However, delayed developer releases and slow consumer adoption caused HTC to lose its PC VR edge and fall behind in mobile VR. Without a user base or content foundation, launching a tech-based product late is risky.
Additionally, many startup teams have already launched mobile VR hardware with independent R&D, rather than relying on Qualcomm’s VRDK reference design. These teams can develop more advanced products, free from Qualcomm’s limitations.
Cabinet Energy Storage,Battery Energy Storage Systems,Solar Energy Solution,Battery Storage
Guangdong Yuqiu Intelligent Technology Co.,Ltd , https://www.cntcetltd.com