Home / News & Analysis / Hands On With the Impressive Oculus ‘Santa Cruz’ Headset

Hands On With the Impressive Oculus ‘Santa Cruz’ Headset

With Oculus VR's upcoming Santa Cruz headset, virtual reality fans have reason to be excited.

I had a chance to demo the prototype device for about 15 minutes at the Oculus Connect developer conference this week, and I found it to be the most impressive VR headset to date.

The Santa Cruz prototype does away with the cords, external sensors, and high-end gaming PC required on the existing Oculus Rift headset. With Santa Cruz, all the necessary components are built into the headset itself, and what a difference a fully wireless VR experience can make.

That sounds great, but how does Santa Cruz work in practice? Quite well. At times, I felt almost removed from the real world.

During a demo of the game Dead and Buried, I scrambled to avoid getting killed by zombies. In another title, Timestalled, I lunged back and forth to fend off a robot attack. The action was nothing new for experienced VR gamers. But with the Santa Cruz prototype, I could play without having to worry about ripping out or tripping over a cord.

As a result, I was free to physically spin my body around, leaping and moving through the space with abandon. In every instance, the Santa Cruz headset tracked my movements fairly accurately as I rotated 360 degrees.

[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RlPZ_EGIv4?wmode=transparent&w=740&h=416]

Unfortunately, Oculus didn't allow any pictures during the demo. But the headset and the games I played encouraged me to wander about on my own two feet. And so I did, feeling more immersed in a virtual environment than I have with the company's existing Oculus Rift headset.

The Santa Cruz prototype has certainly come a long way since it was first previewed a year ago. During PCMag's brief demo in 2016, we found it to be promising but clearly a work in progress. Back then, the device included a computer that strapped behind the user's head, a noisy fan, and a battery that dangled from the headband.

The latest version gets rid of that clunkiness and looks and feels like a polished product. The battery and computer are encased inside the headset, which comfortably fit over my head.

Oculus has also redesigned its controllers, which I had no trouble using. During a game called Boundless, I fed and played fetch with a pet creature and kneeled down to pick up cartoon fruit off the ground. The Santa Cruz headset read the controllers without any noticeable hitch.

A demo of the game Boundless, which was used in the Oculus VR

The whole experience was so immersive that when I pulled the headset off, my brain was almost surprised I was back in the real world, and my mind needed a moment to adjust.

For now, Santa Cruz is still a prototype even though it's clearly coming into focus. But I do wonder about the product's battery life and computing power, two factors that might significantly limit how long someone can actually use the headset or what games they can play.

Unfortunately, Oculus isn't revealing anything about the device's technical specs, price, or release date. But the prototype certainly makes me optimistic for VR's future. Developers will begin receiving development kits for the Santa Cruz headset some time next year.

Read more

Check Also

The new era in mobile

Joe Apprendi Contributor Joe Apprendi is a general partner at Revel Partners. More posts by this contributor Big data’s humble beginnings A future dominated by autonomous vehicles (AVs) is, for many experts, a foregone conclusion. Declarations that the automobile will become the next living room are almost as common — but, they are imprecise. In our inevitable driverless future, the more apt comparison is to the mobile device. As with smartphones, operating systems will go a long way toward determining what autonomous vehicles are and what they could be. For mobile app companies trying to seize on the coming AV opportunity, their future depends on how the OS landscape shapes up. By most measures, the mobile app economy is still growing, yet the time people spend using their apps is actually starting to dip. A recent study reported that overall app session activity grew only 6 percent in 2017, down from the 11 percent growth it reported in 2016. This trend suggests users are reaching a saturation point in terms of how much time they can devote to apps. The AV industry could reverse that. But just how mobile apps will penetrate this market and who will hold the keys in this new era of mobility is still very much in doubt. When it comes to a driverless future, multiple factors are now converging. Over the last few years, while app usage showed signs of stagnation, the push for driverless vehicles has only intensified. More cities are live-testing driverless software than ever, and investments in autonomous vehicle technology and software by tech giants like Google and Uber (measured in the billions) are starting to mature. And, after some reluctance, automakers have now embraced this idea of a driverless future. Expectations from all sides point to a “passenger economy” of mobility-as-a-service, which, by some estimates, may be worth as much as $7 trillion by 2050. For mobile app companies this suggests several interesting questions: Will smart cars, like smartphones before them, be forced to go “exclusive” with a single OS of record (Google, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon/AGL), or will they be able to offer multiple OS/platforms of record based on app maturity or functionality? Or, will automakers simply step in to create their own closed loop operating systems, fragmenting the market completely? Automakers and tech companies clearly recognize the importance of “connected mobility.” Complicating the picture even further is the potential significance of an OS’s ability to support multiple Digital Assistants of Record (independent of the OS), as we see with Google Assistant now working on iOS. Obviously, voice NLP/U will be even more critical for smart car applications as compared to smart speakers and phones. Even in those established arenas the battle for OS dominance is only just beginning. Opening a new front in driverless vehicles could have a fascinating impact. Either way, the implications for mobile app companies are significant. Looking at the driverless landscape today there are several indications as to which direction the OSes in AVs will ultimately go. For example, after some initial inroads developing their own fleet of autonomous vehicles, Google has now focused almost all its efforts on autonomous driving software while striking numerous partnership deals with traditional automakers. Some automakers, however, are moving forward developing their own OSes. Volkswagen, for instance, announced that vw.OS will be introduced in VW brand electric cars from 2020 onward, with an eye toward autonomous driving functions. (VW also plans to launch a fleet of autonomous cars in 2019 to rival Uber.) Tesla, a leader in AV, is building its own unified hardware-software stack. Companies like Udacity, however, are building an “open-source” self-driving car tech. Mobileye and Baidu have a partnership in place to provide software for automobile manufacturers. Clearly, most smartphone apps would benefit from native integration, but there are several categories beyond music, voice and navigation that require significant hardware investment to natively integrate. Will automakers be interested in the Tesla model? If not, how will smart cars and apps (independent of OS/voice assistant) partner up? Given the hardware requirements necessary to enable native app functionality and optimal user experience, how will this force smart car manufacturers to work more seamlessly with platforms like AGL to ensure competitive advantage and differentiation? And, will this commoditize the OS dominance we see in smartphones today? It’s clearly still early days and — at least in the near term — multiple OS solutions will likely be employed until preferred solutions rise to the top. Regardless, automakers and tech companies clearly recognize the importance of “connected mobility.” Connectivity and vehicular mobility will very likely replace traditional auto values like speed, comfort and power. The combination of Wi-Fi hotspot and autonomous vehicles (let alone consumer/business choice of on-demand vehicles) will propel instant conversion/personalization of smart car environments to passenger preferences. And, while questions remain around the how and the who in this new era in mobile, it’s not hard to see the why. Americans already spend an average of 293 hours per year inside a car, and the average commute time has jumped around 20 percent since 1980. In a recent survey (conducted by Ipsos/GenPop) researchers found that in a driverless future people would spend roughly a third of the time communicating with friends and family or for business and online shopping. By 2030, it’s estimated the autonomous cars “will free up a mind-blowing 1.9 trillion minutes for passengers.” Another analysis suggested that even with just 10 percent adoption, driverless cars could account for $250 billion in driver productivity alone. Productivity in this sense extends well beyond personal entertainment and commerce and into the realm of business productivity. Use of integrated display (screen and heads-up) and voice will enable business multi-tasking from video conferencing, search, messaging, scheduling, travel booking, e-commerce and navigation. First-mover advantage goes to the mobile app companies that first bundle into a single compelling package information density, content access and mobility. An app company that can claim 10 to 15 percent of this market will be a significant player. For now, investors are throwing lots of money at possible winners in the autonomous automotive race, who, in turn, are beginning to define the shape of the mobile app landscape in a driverless future. In fact, what we’re seeing now looks a lot like the early days of smartphones with companies like Tesla, for example, applying an Apple -esque strategy for smart car versus smartphone. Will these OS/app marketplaces be dominated by a Tesla — or Google (for that matter) — and command a 30 percent revenue share from apps, or will auto manufacturers with proprietary platforms capitalize on this opportunity? Questions like these — while at the same time wondering just who the winners and losers in AV will be — mean investment and entrepreneurship in the mobile app sector is an extremely lucrative but risky gamble.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Disclaimer: Trading in bitcoins or other digital currencies carries a high level of risk and can result in the total loss of the invested capital. theonlinetech.org does not provide investment advice, but only reflects its own opinion. Please ensure that if you trade or invest in bitcoins or other digital currencies (for example, investing in cloud mining services) you fully understand the risks involved! Please also note that some external links are affiliate links.