Pretty much the title say it all...i want to know if the VR would support apps such as Youtube, or other movies app that we use on Note 4...or even play our own movies that are stored on our Micro SD CARD?
loaferkan said:
Pretty much the title say it all...i want to know if the VR would support apps such as Youtube, or other movies app that we use on Note 4...or even play our own movies that are stored on our Micro SD CARD?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Based on the countless hours I have spent reading through every minute detail I could find about Gear VR, here is what we know that you will be able to do and not do with the unit out of the box:
CAN:
- Play back your own standard-format (MP4, etc) movie files within the immersive Oculus Cinema
- Download and play VR games from the proprietary game/app store; these have been curated specifically by Oculus
- Browse photos that have been pre-installed with the Gear VR, or your own photos. At the Oculus Connect conference, Oculus confirmed that it was possible to have 360-degree viewing of pictures taken from the Ricoh Theta camera (and thus, likely, other 360-degree user-generated images as well)
- Play Oculus-curated 3D movies, including stereoscopic 3D 360-degree live-action and animated experiences
- Use either 3.5mm wired headphones or a Bluetooth wireless headset to listen to audio. Otherwise, audio will be played through the device's external speakers.
CAN NOT (YET):
- Use apps on your phone that are not part of the Gear VR ecosystem (including texting, calling, etc)
- Watch your own 3D movie files that are encoded in side-by-side/over-under, etc. Preliminary reports show that there is no way to denote or recognize these files as such, meaning the Oculus Cinema will treat them as 2D movies and leave the original split video presentation intact.
- Access content that was purchased outside of the Gear VR ecosystem (Google Play movies, Vudu movies, etc, etc)
The Oculus team got low-level access to the actual hardware of the phone so they have manipulated it in ways that no other software maker can. That being said, it is only common sense that down the road there will be access to services like Netflix, whether that is a custom Gear VR experience or some way to seamlessly integrate the existing Netflix Android experience. The same will surely go for any number of other apps. For now, though, you will only be able to experience the stuff that Oculus has designed for you to experience.
Let me know if I've missed anything!
mdude04 said:
Based on the countless hours I have spent reading through every minute detail I could find about Gear VR, here is what we know that you will be able to do and not do with the unit out of the box:
CAN:
- Play back your own standard-format (MP4, etc) movie files within the immersive Oculus Cinema
- Download and play VR games from the proprietary game/app store; these have been curated specifically by Oculus
- Browse photos that have been pre-installed with the Gear VR, or your own photos. At the Oculus Connect conference, Oculus confirmed that it was possible to have 360-degree viewing of pictures taken from the Ricoh Theta camera (and thus, likely, other 360-degree user-generated images as well)
- Play Oculus-curated 3D movies, including stereoscopic 3D 360-degree live-action and animated experiences
- Use either 3.5mm wired headphones or a Bluetooth wireless headset to listen to audio. Otherwise, audio will be played through the device's external speakers.
CAN NOT (YET):
- Use apps on your phone that are not part of the Gear VR ecosystem (including texting, calling, etc)
- Watch your own 3D movie files that are encoded in side-by-side/over-under, etc. Preliminary reports show that there is no way to denote or recognize these files as such, meaning the Oculus Cinema will treat them as 2D movies and leave the original split video presentation intact.
- Access content that was purchased outside of the Gear VR ecosystem (Google Play movies, Vudu movies, etc, etc)
The Oculus team got low-level access to the actual hardware of the phone so they have manipulated it in ways that no other software maker can. That being said, it is only common sense that down the road there will be access to services like Netflix, whether that is a custom Gear VR experience or some way to seamlessly integrate the existing Netflix Android experience. The same will surely go for any number of other apps. For now, though, you will only be able to experience the stuff that Oculus has designed for you to experience.
Let me know if I've missed anything!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Note however that I would not recommend watching a movie this way. The field of view is larger than your field of vision. This means that you cannot see everything on screen at the same time and will mean movie watching is fatiguing. This is why alternatives like the Sony HMD units have an optimum "cinema" field of view angle. I am sure it will be initially impressive to watch like this, but I think watching a whole movie could be challenging.
Look at this. It seems like watching a movie is a great experience.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtRSOUbpDgM
jonstatt said:
Note however that I would not recommend watching a movie this way. The field of view is larger than your field of vision. This means that you cannot see everything on screen at the same time and will mean movie watching is fatiguing. This is why alternatives like the Sony HMD units have an optimum "cinema" field of view angle. I am sure it will be initially impressive to watch like this, but I think watching a whole movie could be challenging.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are incorrect. With the Gear VR, you also get a "cinema" experience. You watch the video from in the middle of a virtual movie theater (or other custom environments), so there will be no fatigue and you will very much be able to see everything on screen at the same time.
mdude04 said:
You are incorrect. With the Gear VR, you also get a "cinema" experience. You watch the video from in the middle of a virtual movie theater (or other custom environments), so there will be no fatigue and you will very much be able to see everything on screen at the same time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think mdude04 make sense. I'm sure that the Gear VR makers wouldn't allow us to watch movies directly from our own apps, or a matter of fact youtube...but who going to stop these great Devs here who can has turn our phone the future phones...the things that Samsung or any other company come out with, we already have experienced it long before...lol
I'll try to invest in it, until I see the Devs has worked on custom rom or software for it.
mdude04 said:
You are incorrect. With the Gear VR, you also get a "cinema" experience. You watch the video from in the middle of a virtual movie theater (or other custom environments), so there will be no fatigue and you will very much be able to see everything on screen at the same time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Before you start saying I am "incorrect", let's just get things a bit clearer here as your post wasn't very clear on the "how" this might be done. The main issue with the Oculus Rift which I have tried BTW for movie is its 110 degree field of view. The Samsung has a FOV of 96 degrees which is much too large for watching a movie. In comparison the Sony HMD-T3W which I also have, is 45 degrees. 45 degrees is considered the optimum movie viewing experience, sitting in the middle row of a large theatre screen. 96 degrees would be like sitting in the front row, which for most people is not a comfortable place to sit. So the only way that Samsung could reconcile this is to not use the whole resolution of the Note 4 display, which woudn't be great, as to my understanding each eye is not receiving a 1080 image to start with (as the 2560x1440 display is chopped in half, with half going to the left eye and half going to the right).
In discussions on various forums, there is a "general" opinion that the glasses you wear for playing virtual reality games or experiences needs a big FOV so you feel you are actually there, whereas movies need a smaller one. This typically means owning two pairs of this type of glasses, or compromising resolution so that the movie is not taking up the full screen area.
So could you explain more about how Samsung handles this?
I will be getting the Gear VR anyway, but for the hopefully stellar VR experiences.
jonstatt said:
Before you start saying I am "incorrect", let's just get things a bit clearer here as your post wasn't very clear on the "how" this might be done. The main issue with the Oculus Rift which I have tried BTW for movie is its 110 degree field of view. The Samsung has a FOV of 96 degrees which is much too large for watching a movie. In comparison the Sony HMD-T3W which I also have, is 45 degrees. 45 degrees is considered the optimum movie viewing experience, sitting in the middle row of a large theatre screen. 96 degrees would be like sitting in the front row, which for most people is not a comfortable place to sit. So the only way that Samsung could reconcile this is to not use the whole resolution of the Note 4 display, which woudn't be great, as to my understanding each eye is not receiving a 1080 image to start with (as the 2560x1440 display is chopped in half, with half going to the left eye and half going to the right).
In discussions on various forums, there is a "general" opinion that the glasses you wear for playing virtual reality games or experiences needs a big FOV so you feel you are actually there, whereas movies need a smaller one. This typically means owning two pairs of this type of glasses, or compromising resolution so that the movie is not taking up the full screen area.
So could you explain more about how Samsung handles this?
I will be getting the Gear VR anyway, but for the hopefully stellar VR experiences.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Gear VR is going to ship with Oculus Cinema, which allows you to watch your own content in a virtual movie theater. It simulates that "Perfect Seat" experience of being in a movie theater. It effectively fills your field of vision, no more, no less, and (if you want) allows you to move your head around the theater and look around.
In terms of video quality, you're not going to lose anything. It only plays back 2D content, yes, but this allows the use of interlacing to maintain a full 1080i image. Essentially, the sum of the parts to make the whole.
If 3D playback was added in down the road, you would lose out on the quality more than likely, but it all depends on how it's implemented.
John Carmack (CTO of Oculus, and lead on the Gear VR project with Samsung) even mentioned that he's watched the entire Matrix trilogy on his, and he said it was incredible.
xxbadsushixx said:
The Gear VR is going to ship with Oculus Cinema, which allows you to watch your own content in a virtual movie theater. It simulates that "Perfect Seat" experience of being in a movie theater. It effectively fills your field of vision, no more, no less, and (if you want) allows you to move your head around the theater and look around.
In terms of video quality, you're not going to lose anything. It only plays back 2D content, yes, but this allows the use of interlacing to maintain a full 1080i image. Essentially, the sum of the parts to make the whole.
If 3D playback was added in down the road, you would lose out on the quality more than likely, but it all depends on how it's implemented.
John Carmack (CTO of Oculus, and lead on the Gear VR project with Samsung) even mentioned that he's watched the entire Matrix trilogy on his, and he said it was incredible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HI,On the contrarytThe way it is implemented in VR Headset,there is no way you would lose in quality in 3D playback since for 2D playbackyou already sending twice the same image for each eye hence the quality has already been lowered(You only see half of the display)
If there was a single lense instead of the 2 at the moment the whole screen would be entirely visible and you would have a 2D Screen much larger and with much better resolution...
And maybe in this case i believe screen door effect would be even less visible.
IF you have Side by Side (SBS or TTB) videos there is no reason the experience would be less than a 2D film providing Oculus Cinema is
able to natively manage that 3D SBS format.
joexda75 said:
HI,On the contrarytThe way it is implemented in VR Headset,there is no way you would lose in quality in 3D playback since for 2D playbackyou already sending twice the same image for each eye hence the quality has already been lowered(You only see half of the display)
If there was a single lense instead of the 2 at the moment the whole screen would be entirely visible and you would have a 2D Screen much larger and with much better resolution...
And maybe in this case i believe screen door effect would be even less visible.
IF you have Side by Side (SBS or TTB) videos there is no reason the experience would be less than a 2D film providing Oculus Cinema is
able to natively manage that 3D SBS format.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep. And in fact, looking through Oculus's newly released developer documentation, it is in fact possible to watch 3D videos in the Oculus Cinema from day one. It looks like you either need to follow some kind of naming convention when importing your SBS content into the micro SD card, or place it into a specially designated "3D" folder. That will give the Gear VR the information it needs to recognize that it is a 3D video, and it will be rendered on the virtual movie screen accordingly.
Just another awesome reason to be excited about Gear VR!
Wonder if the movies referred to were watched in 1080 or 2k resolution...
xxbadsushixx said:
In terms of video quality, you're not going to lose anything. It only plays back 2D content, yes, but this allows the use of interlacing to maintain a full 1080i image. Essentially, the sum of the parts to make the whole.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think John Carmack said the resolution of the video shown in the oculus cinema is 720p.
---------- Post added at 01:23 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:49 AM ----------
jonstatt said:
So could you explain more about how Samsung handles this?
I will be getting the Gear VR anyway, but for the hopefully stellar VR experiences.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i don't know if you have seen this video yet, it gives an idea how the moon theater in oculus cinema looks and there is also cirque du soleil video later on.
http://youtu.be/SVwNz4_NbRw?t=38s
I honestly can't wait to get the Gear VR. I in a lot of ways looking forward to it more than I did the Note 4 itself.
I can't wait to watch a movie on the frickin moon! I must say brief shot of the reflections hitting the ground on the moon look incredible.
is this different than oculus ?
or more or less the same ?
these 2 looks futuristic
awesomista said:
is this different than oculus ?
or more or less the same ?
these 2 looks futuristic
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Gear VR has a better display than the Oculus Rift DK2, lower latency and no wires. The Dk2 has wires but is connected to a PC and therefore you have better looking graphics but you would also need a more powerful PC to use it wiithout judder and high FPS.
The DK2 has besides Headtracking also positional tracking, the Gear VR does not have positional tracking yet but most likely the next version of the Gear VR will. But when you buy additional STEM packs or STEM controllers from sixense, then you also already get positional tracking with the first version of the Gear VR.
Powerslash said:
The Gear VR has a better display than the Oculus Rift DK2, lower latency and no wires. The Dk2 has wires but is connected to a PC and therefore you have better looking graphics but you would also need a more powerful PC to use it wiithout judder and high FPS.
The DK2 has besides Headtracking also positional tracking, the Gear VR does not have positional tracking yet but most likely the next version of the Gear VR will. But when you buy additional STEM packs or STEM controllers from sixense, then you also already get positional tracking with the first version of the Gear VR.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
mindblown......
too hard to understand hahaha
awesomista said:
mindblown......
too hard to understand hahaha
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both devices can do headtracking that means, you can look around 360° in a virtual world.
Positional tracking what the Oculus Rift DK2 can do with help of a special camera mounted to the pc and the Gear VR with additional controllers/packs means that you can also lean to the left/right and front/back in the virtual world.
For the Gear VR you will need the Galaxy Note 4 to run it and for the DK2 you will need a beefy PC.
The Gear VR has a higher resolution display, lower latency means that you look around with less lag/judder but when everything is optimized on the PC then it should perform similarly and you have no wires, so you can use the Gear VR on your couch, in bed, on a plane, in a hotel and easier showcase it to family and friends without having to bring along your PC, camera and cables.
Related
I was fortunate to get my hands on a Chromecast at my local BestBuy the other day, and after a full day of use it is one of the best $25 (had a $10 reward cert) I have spent since my last trip to Outback Steakhouse .
Getting the dongle up and running in my entertainment center was a bit awkward with the mini USB required for powering the device, but all went smoothly. First time set up was simple, requiring installation of the Chromecast app on my HTC One which was able to pair with the dongle and hook it up to my home WiFi network. Once connected to WiFi, it's ready to use, displaying the "Ready to Cast" home screen.
Google Play Music was the first app I tried out, and I was immediately disappointed to get the error message "Unable to Cast sideloaded content". Hopefully an update for local content will be added to phones and tablets in the near future, since it is only possible within the Chrome browser on your Mac/PC. Music playback through their Unlimited music service worked as advertise though, however the Now Playing interface displayed on the TV could use a bit more polish. It doesn't look awful, but it doesn't look very good either. Every now and then I would get an error when selecting songs saying "Could not stream your selection at this time," where I would have to kill the app from the multitask screen and restart.
Where this device thrives is video playback. Netflix, Youtube, and Google Play Videos are the only content supported so far but they deliver. Watching AMC's The Killing and The Avengers in 1080p by simply "casting" to my TV with my new Nexus 7 is a real treat. And the best part is I can use my tablet while watching for anything I want. Be it games, web browsing, reading, or music; it doesn't effect playback at all since it is being streamed by the dongle, not your phone/tablet/computer. Even better, ChromeCast has minimal effect on battery life of your device. I started an episode of The Killing with 55% battery, after the episode was over about an hour later my battery held at 54%.
I have not been able to try out screen mirroring yet, but will update once I play around with it. Overall I am satisfied with my purchase. The lack of local media support on phones/tablets are preventing it from being a serious threat to AirPlay and the Apple TV, but at the same time being 65% cheaper make it a more than reasonable trade off. The way I see this device: it makes watching Netflix on my TV simpler. Before it was turning on my PS3, navigating to the Netflix app, waiting for it to load, choosing between regular content or kids, and then finally getting to pick what I would like to watch. Now I just switch to the input my Chromecast is hooked up to, fire up the Netflix app on my phone/tablet (whichever is closer), make my selection, and then "cast" to my TV.
If you are looking for a fast simple way to watch Netflix, YouTube, and movie rentals through Google Play this device is for you. If you are expecting an Airplay/Apple TV killer, well this device isn't for you...yet. With its open API for future dev support, it is just a matter of time for local files and more streaming sites such as HBO GO and Hulu to be supported.
The oneinfour score: 7.5/10 - lack of local content playback and wacky music playback issues hold back an otherwise solid streamer.
interesting read.
I think we may be waiting a bit for Hulu to get on board. They're a bit quirky regarding the various contract and licensing agreements. To me, they should just view this as HDMI out on the Hulu app, but who knows. Sometimes they're just obtuse because one can just hook up a PC to the TV and have all content available.
It's early, so to some degree, we're going to see a lot of growing pains as the product matures. I look forward to trying it out myself when I eventually get one.
Chromecasting a chrome tab on your desktop allows HBO go (and others I presume) to work with your chromecast. I was even able to drag and drop a local mkv file into the active chrome tab and it played on my TV just fine. Some pixelation and artifacting, but mostly negligible. Audio synced up fine too. Here's a video of it in action
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GT2XUI-yZxE&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
Chromecast messes with AdBlocker
You can't expect it to be compatible with every third party app. Adblocker needs to fix on their end.
As far as Chromecast.. I went to buy one and it is sold out every where.
What would be amazing would be a device that would allow us to send screen to TV for gaming, etc.. With the higher res this would be awesome on my 1080 Bravia!
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app
oneinfour said:
The way I see this device: it makes watching Netflix on my TV simpler. Before it was turning on my PS3, navigating to the Netflix app, waiting for it to load, choosing between regular content or kids, and then finally getting to pick what I would like to watch. Now I just switch to the input my Chromecast is hooked up to, fire up the Netflix app on my phone/tablet (whichever is closer), make my selection, and then "cast" to my TV.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is what makes it a potentially killer app. I own a roku, a wdtv, an htpc (out of commission because of fan noise), and I have had multiple cable boxes. In terms of interfaces, nothing has gotten it right. Interfaces are either time consuming to get working, slow, unpolished, or difficult to navigate. Worse, sometimes they rely on unstable hacks that are destroyed by API changes. The difference with chromecast is that most of the apps on your tablet and phone are fairly polished, speedy, and easy to navigate. Most importantly, the video is separated from the UI, meaning you don't stop what you're doing to look at something else. There are a lot of great ways that this can be used: Playing a movie automatically brings up more information about that movie on the tablet; it could tell you the names of the actors on the screen (I think amazon has something like this). Song lyrics could be displayed on the tablet. Sky is the limit in that respect.
Yes, screen mirroring would be nice, but I doubt it will ever work as well as we want it to on this device. Google has not released an API for windows or mac os so speed may never be something we see on the desktop. We will see though.
It would depend on the screen it was being mirrored too and would not be perfect but it would be awesome.
Ideally instead of having to stay media info chrome I would just like to my screen on the TV. That would be a huge selling point for Google.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app
Why do you think direct local streaming was not included? Just seems like no brainer to me... Anyway I think ill probably go pick one up once Skype gets on board with suppprt.
Great review, I agree with everything you wrote. I am loving mine so far too. If Amazon wakes up and adds support, this will be a killer little dongle. Though, if they don't, then I will just starting buying my TV shows and Movies from Google's store instead =)
I too would like to see the ability to stream local content soon, and also from the cloud services like Dropbox/Box/Drive/etc. The developers have already proven it to be possible, with great results ... it is really up to Google now to allow it to happen. The fact that they released the Chromecast without local file support has me a little worried. But I am hoping this was more a scheduling decision to get it out the door to beat the competition to the punch and get people talking.
This cheap little gadget has the potential to shake up the media industry in a big way.
Hello folks,
I got my Chromecast, it works, I like it.
But I find it unnerving that the system is so closed.
Some guy has, months ago, released something he called "PiCast" as an open alternative on the Raspberry Pi.
I wonder: Why aren't there more devs bringing an open, extensible alternative, installable on a Raspberry Pi or other small computer, to life? I really don't understand it, since. like I see it, it doesn't seem particularly complicated! The following features would at least have to be implemented:
***********************************************
- media player software which can play a broad palette of formats and stream from different sources (VLC, Mplayer etc. come to mind an can surely be used as a part of the project)
- web interface which accepts URLs (web or LAN) of files that are to be played and passes them to the media player; and which accepts control commands for the now playing file like pause, forward etc.
Most convenient would be if these URLs could not only be http ones, but also SMB, streaming protocols etc.
Don't we all want a device where we NOT are confined to certain formats?
- apps for computers and mobile devices which let the user choose files he wants to watch / listen to and pass the URL to the web interface and which pass control commands like pause, forward to the web interface
- a customized, lean OS with a Chromecast-like, very simple UI
*************************************************
Any thoughts?
Best wishes,
Hasenbein
The entire reason for the CCast (which essentially replaced the GoogleTV fiasco) was to keep the system closed enough to get Content providers to support it due to the ability to use DRM and control the players being used.
Why do you think other projects like XBMC still to this day do NOT (and will NEVER) have access to Netflix for any sustainable time because Netflix will change their encryption and break any player app they do not have complete control over.
GoogleTV was actually blacklisted by the network websites to prevent it from playing content. All because it was just a little too open for their liking.
What @Asphyx said, plus Android TV sticks have been around for quite some time and already do similar. The key difference is market share. History is littered with proposed "standards" that never won. In the end it's not what is better, sometimes not even what's cheaper, but what picks up.
Iomega's Zip drive was inferior to SyQuest EZ drive, but Iomega won by marketing and hence adoption. Developers had more incentive to support Zip drives (not that much was specifically required but still) because there was a wider audience and market for them.
Adobe's changing the design market the same way. I still have CS6, but more and more I'm getting files from people on CC. And it's annoying. Essentially I'm being forced into CC if I want to work with anybody outside of my four walls.
Even though it's only available in select retail channels, Google is pushing Chromecast with TV ads. The fact that they've sold (or at least shipped) millions is a strong testament to its adoption rate. Even at my local stores, I can say just by the serial numbers they've cycled through, at least 500 have left the shelf since August 2013.
The market share attracts content providers, and the closed nature gives their lawyers ease regarding theft. Sure, there will always be people supporting TV sticks with clever solutions that are free or near-free, though they sometimes require jumping through numerous hoops (even moreso than Chromecast of today), and if something doesn't work as required, it involved researching. It's not like you can put in a support ticket or call support. Granted, Chromecast support isn't outstanding... but many of my non-techy friends have adopted Chromecast, even without hearing from me, and these are not people who visit XDA, nor are they people who would ever have run across or even considered an Android TV stick, nor are they people who have any idea of what an Arduino or Raspberry Pi is.
The draw is the consumer, and the consumer needs content to consume. Which means longevity of the product/concept/standard depends on support from the content providers.
At the price point of Chromecast it seems to be designed to draw in not just first timers, but also customers who may already have a media to TV solution but it's lacking in simplicity or quality. E.g. maybe you have a powerful HTPC that suits all your needs but Netflix is in low-def for DRM reasons. And YouTube stutters on 1080p because Windows keeps trying to do other things in the background while you play it. OK then you put $35 down on a Chromecast and now your Netflix & YouTube videos look better.
And similarly, it's cheap enough that if Chromecast alone does not suit your needs, you can say, well hey, all I spent on the Chromecast was $35, so I don't see why that should stop me from also buying that other media box that does more things.
cmstlist said:
At the price point of Chromecast it seems to be designed to draw in not just first timers, but also customers who may already have a media to TV solution but it's lacking in simplicity or quality.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm definitely in this boat.
I have a semi-Smart TV that supports YouTube, Amazon, and a about 12 other "channels" - but its interface is slow and clunky. It also doesn't support DLNA video (sadly, one model year too early).
I have a HTPC that I use to play DVDs and Blu-rays from my media server, and even though I have a BT keyboard remote for it, navigating between Windows Media Center and browser-sourced video is fiddly.
Chromecast didn't replace my HTPC, it's just giving me a much easier way to view those browser-sourced videos.
However, if/when Chromecast gets DVD and BD playback, it very well might replace my HTPC...
http://blog.vudu.com/?p=10711
https://forum.vudu.com/showthread.php?112941-UltraViolet-FAQ-s
Vudu ultraviolet on Chromecast will displace the need for a disc player or home video server for a number of people. Not sure yet but I'll probably be one of them.
cmstlist said:
At the price point of Chromecast it seems to be designed to draw in not just first timers, but also customers who may already have a media to TV solution but it's lacking in simplicity or quality. E.g. maybe you have a powerful HTPC that suits all your needs but Netflix is in low-def for DRM reasons. And YouTube stutters on 1080p because Windows keeps trying to do other things in the background while you play it. OK then you put $35 down on a Chromecast and now your Netflix & YouTube videos look better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup. I really care about picture quality, so Chromecast offers the cheapest way to get SuperHD Netflix on my TV. If I wasn't bothered about the quality, I'd just connect my tablet with a cable whenever I wanted to watch something.
EarlyMon said:
http://blog.vudu.com/?p=10711
https://forum.vudu.com/showthread.php?112941-UltraViolet-FAQ-s
Vudu ultraviolet on Chromecast will displace the need for a disc player or home video server for a number of people. Not sure yet but I'll probably be one of them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting service and a good idea....
Unfortunately $2 per SD conversion of DVD or $5 to HD is a bit too pricey considering how I have the equipment to rip my own DVD (I have more than 3000 titles in my collection), do the Upconvert and even rip the subtitles to put into an MKV.
But this service will do well because of the sheer number of people who do not have the capability to do that and the ease of use.
I wonder are they actually converting your DVDs or are they doing the much smarter thing and letting you insert the disk, check it for validity and then just giving you access to the already encoded content they have stored?
Asphyx said:
I wonder are they actually converting your DVDs or are they doing the much smarter thing and letting you insert the disk, check it for validity and then just giving you access to the already encoded content they have stored?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The second one, so far as I know.
And if you just enter your digital copy information that works too.
My son-in-law does that but I haven't asked him about the details - he's very happy with the service though.
It's a great Idea....
I have a similar validation system I use....
If I own it already on disc then I feel I have the right to download it if I choose...I paid them their cut so no Guilt involved.
LOL
Similar but I don't pay the conversion fee!
I have a small collection.
I got tired years ago of format changes, player upkeep and having more plastic in the house, so I've been satisfied with rentals. I keep a few favorites on my shelves just in case.
And I had one of my media servers die of old age a few months ago. I'm tired of maintaining my own cloud. Been there, done that. Still do my music and just a few movies now.
I like the ultraviolet model, it sounds simple to me.
And to the OP -
LocalCast does direct entry of http and smb addresses.
EarlyMon said:
I have a small collection.
I got tired years ago of format changes, player upkeep and having more plastic in the house, so I've been satisfied with rentals. I keep a few favorites on my shelves just in case.
And I had one of my media servers die of old age a few months ago. I'm tired of maintaining my own cloud. Been there, done that. Still do my music and just a few movies now.
I like the ultraviolet model, it sounds simple to me.
And to the OP -
LocalCast does direct entry of http and smb addresses.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah unfortunately I live in a very rural area and Cable and Internet outages are common (all the damn trees!)
So when that happens I really have no other recourse than to use whatever is on my Media server to entertain myself...
I went out and invested in a good NAS with Raid that holds 16Tb worth of drives (don't get full16Tbs with Raid though...I may even need to double that soon as I'm running out of space).
My Media Server is my HTPC so I can simply replace that unit if it craps out and just re-install the server software and map the drives.
Been checking out that Chromecast store app...a Lot of stuff in there I didn't know about...
This is a bit of an inelegant solution, but it works and will allow you to enjoy YouTube Streaming to your GVR until Oculus enables it in the cinema. This only works with 3D SBS video.
You need three bits:
1) Titanium Backup (to freeze Gear VR Service).
2) YouTube App.
3) Window Manipulator (if you prefer a letterbox experience).
http://forum.xda-developers.com/android/apps-games/root-window-manipulator-t2846784
The reason for the Window Manipulator is if you wish to create a "fake letterbox" effect to make your view more similar to the Void Theater. Pretty subjective so find what works for you. My favorite overscan settings are 100,0,0,0. YMMV.
If you prefer full immersion, you may find scenes with actors speaking a bit disconcerting because the central focal point has you looking at their mouths as they speak. The trick is to focus on their eyes and you'll be good. This is easier if you move the GVR a bit lower in your face.
1st you need to DISABLE GEAR VR SERVICE on your Note 4 so you can plug into your GRV without Oculus Home Launching. I did this by freezing it in Titanium Backup.
Once you have that set just open a 3D SBS (4k is best) video in the YouTube app and start it. Try not to touch the screen as you do this or you may turn off or minimize your video accidentally. This process will seem awkward at first but will improve as you get used to it.
Once your GVR is on, open your eyes as wide as you can then relax them. This will let your visual focus adjust and the video should be crystal clear. You can set up the YouTube so you select a series of videos and it will play one after the other saving you from putting on and off the GVR.
Hope that helps. Have fun.
Great idea. Thanks
I have not root!
Gesendet von meinem SM-N910F mit Tapatalk
What i did is downloaded the video in the utube 3d sbs via tubemate. Then put the folder to the oculus 3d. Anyway thanks for this idea though?
Side note (about using titanium backup )
I have noticed if you gingerly connect your note 4 to your headset (gear vr) it won't connect to gear vr's main interface, so basically I do this when viewing Google cardboard apps (just a Lil quicker than disabling and enabling stuff ...
If it wasn't for Julius Horsthuis, who recently released 2 fractal animations in 360 format for Gear VR and Oculus Rift, I would never have found this beautiful piece of software called 'Mandelbulb 3D'. It's a FREE piece of 3D rendering software to generate images and videos from the mathematics of complex numbers, aka Fractals. Apparently a breakthrough was made around 2008, when a method was discovered to render a 3D representation of fractals. You can find tons of beautiful work already on google images, vimeo video, etc. Seeing those examples of professional work immediately shows you how amateuristic my first attempt at using this software looks. I have managed to produce something though, and since the Gear VR community is craving for any content, I'm making the file available for download for FREE today at this link :
http://www.mypageofmanythings.com/downloads/amazingboxflythrough.mp4
This 1 min 47 second video gives a quick impression of what is possible with this software. It's just a teaser of what's to come once I know what I'm doing. I've really only spent an hour or 2 learning the software and setting up this first animation so far. So please forgive me for some of the obvious errors I've made flying through walls and stuff. My PC took 18 hours to render all the frames and I have spent many days in frustration trying to get the file converted to the proper format so it plays back in the Gear VR. It turns out that Oculus 360 videos does not support the same file formats as Milk VR. I have my rendered files only working in Milk VR at the moment, so follow these steps to play the video on Gear VR :
Download from link above (^^)
Create folder on root of phone memory (not sd card) called VoltVR
Copy mp4 file into VoltVR folder
Launch Milk VR, open 'downloaded' section, play file
Enjoy this free content for your Gear VR. More to come soon.
AceHighness
Thanks, will check it out!
Here is another clip I rendered ... unfortunately the flight path is quite lame and uninteresting. I don't have enough free time to really work on this, but I wanted your opinion on 30fps vs 60fps , so I'm using this video to show the difference :
30fps : https://www.dropbox.com/s/5424i7akdjup0qu/Trippingbox_30fps_H264vd.mp4?dl=0
60 fps : https://www.dropbox.com/s/54ljlceope49e3z/Trippingbox_60fps_H264vd high br.mp4?dl=0
Is it worth it to make these 60fps ? It looks smoother but takes double time to render (already took 40 hours to render this one)
Hello,
Samsung Gear VR is a game changer for personal media enjoyment.
Not only Virtual Reality that most people might not be interested in it but mainly watching movies in a true cinema theater environment.
lately, hostesses or nearby passengers used to alert me that the plane has landed and that people are out already while i'm enjoying the movie.
i never enjoyed traveling like this before.
the issue with the Gear VR, is head motion tracking, which is a great feature when you are on your couch or chair, but when the airplane or train or car are moving, this becomes annoying because you have to continuously re-align / re-orient screen.
i tried many solutions like disabling the gear service or avoiding inserting the note 4 in the gear usb plug, but then cardboard traditional software like AAA VR, side-by-side player, Kodi, and others didn't function normally like they do on a normal cardboard. in addition to that, the Gear VR cinema is an experience they can't ever beat.
i'm dreaming of a solution that will disable head tracking when on airplane.
"An airplane mode for Samsung Gear VR".
It would be nice if there was a Fixed view option to avoid this. Seems a kind of obvious option IMO.
Not sure I could use one of these in public places (planes too) since do not like being that out of sync with what is around me.
What about selecting the last cinema in the menu? Not the theater, not the moon, but the last one on the right I can't remember its name. I think it has the image fixed and it doesn't depend on your head movement
Keep pushing
It's called Void mode
For movie watching, some Chinese version vr glasses is better than gear vr.
3D VR Glasses overview and demonstration: https://youtu.be/nEALrvhDfIU
what you want is "cmoar virtual cinema" (avaiable in the app store). its the only non-oculus cinema that actually is on the same level (and in some ways a lot more powerful) as mr. carmacks masterpiece. the only thing that is a lot worse is the precision of the head tracking, which is the usual cardboard jitterfest - but then, you want a head tracking free cinema, and cmoar virtual cinema lets you completely disable any head tracking in its settings.
be prepared though that a complete lack of head tracking also feels a bit odd. im not sure, but i think id rather deal with the occasional screen reorienting than with a fixed screen in front of me. after all, the only time where its really that much of an issue is when the plane starts and lands, and the occasional fly route readjustment. same for cars, once youre on the highway, while you dont always go in a straight line (which you very much do on the plane), you still keep going in roughly the same direction and can just follow the screen a bit.
maybe you like the fixed one better. having used both options, im kind of divided (but still recommend the cmoar cinema, be it only because of the other 346974634 features i wish the oculus cinema had). i guess the only real solution is long term, where headsets may track your orientation not only absolute but also relative to your body. you know, when that whole hand recognition thing gets big and all that
zorglub667 said:
what you want is "cmoar virtual cinema" (avaiable in the app store). its the only non-oculus cinema that actually is on the same level (and in some ways a lot more powerful) as mr. carmacks masterpiece. the only thing that is a lot worse is the precision of the head tracking, which is the usual cardboard jitterfest - but then, you want a head tracking free cinema, and cmoar virtual cinema lets you completely disable any head tracking in its settings.
be prepared though that a complete lack of head tracking also feels a bit odd. im not sure, but i think id rather deal with the occasional screen reorienting than with a fixed screen in front of me. after all, the only time where its really that much of an issue is when the plane starts and lands, and the occasional fly route readjustment. same for cars, once youre on the highway, while you dont always go in a straight line (which you very much do on the plane), you still keep going in roughly the same direction and can just follow the screen a bit.
maybe you like the fixed one better. having used both options, im kind of divided (but still recommend the cmoar cinema, be it only because of the other 346974634 features i wish the oculus cinema had). i guess the only real solution is long term, where headsets may track your orientation not only absolute but also relative to your body. you know, when that whole hand recognition thing gets big and all that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed with Cmoar. It has more codec support, Youtube 2D/3D support and video LAN streaming. Worth the $7 IMO. I also use with a generic VR unit since the app has barrel and FOV adjustments.
It makes the Oculus effort so far seem very shallow, but Oculus wants to control content as much as possible, so of course no streaming LAN or Youtube in Oculus They are hoping people are too lazy to copy content on the device themselves. Perhaps a future update will stop that.....
yes, the oculus approach of trying to create a confined ecosystem is starting to get a bit annoying. doesnt go well with the whole early adopters vibe of VR at the moment. i truly think they need to open this up, but since theres not much outrage from users about this, this will probably never happen.
shame how times have changed, and how people got used to what once was something only apples IOS dared to do to its users.
just think about it, for the very same reason, we will probably never have the wonderful cmoar cinema running as a real oculus app. which is a real shame, cause the featureset of that cinema is truly mighty impressive. i love the oculus cinema for its smoothness and quality of craftsmanship, but in terms of features, it doesnt hold a candle to cmoar. cmoar is truly better in every regard except the usual cardboard app jitter (for which i blame the underlying google VR framework).
meh. not an ideal situation. i dont mind the whole early adopters thing. but to combine that with the restricted nature of a closed ecosystem from day one is really a huge letdown. i fully understand the motives behind it and would happily go with that, but thats a move you can make once you have lots and lots and lots of content, but not in these early stages IMO.