The concept of an immersive virtual reality world is one that is often talked and written about. It also has been the subject of several movies. When it is the topic of books and movies, it is rarely a good thing. So, when we hear about the creation of a fully immersive world, we view it with a healthy bit of skepticism. Especially when the person behind it is Mark Zuckerberg and his company, Facebook. You might ask why, and there is an easy answer. Facebook ceased being a communication platform a very, very long time ago and is now nothing more than a way to collect information and push ads.

Facebook has not had the best history when it comes to handling online bullying, social stalking and even sexual abuse and exploitation. They do have and are continuing to develop tools to fight against this, but for the most part they do not take a very proactive role in policing this type of behavior. To some it seems that they spend more time “fact checking” and policing opinions than they do addressing any truly bad behavior. It is up to the user to make sure they are practicing good and safe habits when using Facebook or Instagram, not the platform.

There has been a lot of talk about Meta’s The Reality Labs department losing $10 Billion on devilment of Metaverse. Mant articles have focused on the negative and the overall amount of money lost while others have chosen to focus on more positive or normalized effects of the loss and what is means long term. The argument seems to be split in a couple of ways. The first is that $10 Billion is not a devastating loss in terms of R&D on a potential defining product for a company that made $117+ Billion in 2021. The second is that a $10 Billion dollar loss on a new product is a bad thing and might be an indication of a lack of true acceptance.

Microsoft has a history of making solid products that go nowhere. If you look at their history this is very clear from Windows Phone to Zune and more. They build it, fail to focus on penetrating the market and then scrap it despite the many talented people on the teams for each of these. Now history is repeating itself in the form of HoloLens.

Over the last couple of days, we have received information that would indicate nVidia is not moving to HBM 2 for their consumer GPUs (outside of some extremely high-end models). Instead, they appear to be focusing on improvements found in GDDR5X and GDDR6. Conversely, AMD appears to be focusing on HBM for many of their high-end and even some mid-range cards. The two very different paths has sparked something of a debate amongst fans of both products (as you can imagine). The questions are, why chose one over the other at this point and is HBM a truly viable option for AMD?

This is going to be a little bit of a departure from how we would normally approach covering specific technology. Instead of addressing the state of hardware based on what we have actually worked with, we are going to look at VR from the standpoint of a consumer looking to buy for the first time. There are a couple of reasons to do this; the first is that we do not have either an Oculus Rift, HTC Vive or any other PC based VR technology. We do have the Oculus powered Gear VR, but that is in a category all on its own which we will cover in some detail below.  So with the preface out of the way, let’s get started

The experts have all weighed in. 2016 will be the year of Virtual Reality. The problem is that the experts are very often wrong. Still that has not stopped multiple companies from pushing out new VR headsets, APIs, development kits and more. The craze has gone so far as to start effecting the way that companies are making core hardware. We already know that AMD is pushing for VR mastery with new products and by showing which existing products also have a level of VR support.

It is said that nature abhors a vacuum and that is certainly true. Something will come along to fill the void if we let nature take its course. Unfortunately this law is a little mutated in the consumer electronics market and especially in the PC component world. Here is reads; the market cannot stand not having an “It” technology, so we much create one. It seems that the last few years we have been watching this happen.

Yesterday we talked about the possibility that AMD will launch a Dual-GPU R9 Fury X card geared for 4k and VR. This is certainly welcome news for most AMD fans and for fans of virtual reality. It was no coincidence that the first time we are seeing this in operation was at a big VR event in LA or that the launch is rumored to coincide with the launch of Oculus and HTC’s Vive headsets. This move would be a very high-end AMD card on the market around April/May of this year.

Recently a comment from former Valve contractor, Fabian Giesen that VR is “bad news” brought up an interesting point. On the surface the technology has some interesting implications for making gaming, multi-media and even social networking more interactive and engaging. However, there is a much darker side to this technology that might escape the eye because of the flashy parts.