Category Archives: Virtual Reality

Virtual reality is an artificial environment that is created with software and presented to the user in such a way that the user suspends belief and accepts it as a real environment. On a computer, virtual reality is primarily experienced through two of the five senses: sight and sound.

The simplest form of virtual reality is a 3-D image that can be explored interactively at a personal computer, usually by manipulating keys or the mouse so that the content of the image moves in some direction or zooms in or out. More sophisticated efforts involve such approaches as wrap-around display screens, actual rooms augmented with wearable computers, and haptics devices that let you feel the display images.

Virtual reality can be divided into:

The Virtual Reality Modelling Language (VRML) allows the creator to specify images and the rules for their display and interaction using textual language statements.

See also: augmented reality

See a video introduction to virtual reality:

Read the original here:

What is virtual reality? - Definition from WhatIs.com

After years of teases, tantalizing promises, and Kickstarter campaigns, virtual reality finally became actual reality in 2016, with VRs mere existence thrusting the entire PC industry into glorious, wonderful turmoil. Despite being around for just a handful of months, virtual reality has already inspired totally new genres of computers, wormed its way deep into Windows, and sent the price of graphics cards plummeting.

Not too shabby for VRs first real year on the streets, though the implementations could still use some fine-tuning. Lets look back at howthis wild new frontier blossomed in 2016.

From the very start of 2016 it was clear that the dawn of proper PC-powered VR had arrived. You could see evidence of this fact all overCES 2016 in January, where EVGA introduced a specialized graphics card designed to fit VR headset ergonomics; Nvidia rolled out a VR certification program;and seemingly every booth boasted some sort of virtual-reality hook, from VR treadmills toVR pornandVR Everest climbs(the latter two being mind-blowing in their own ways).

The PC world was ready. But virtual reality itself wasnt, at least until the Oculus Rifts big consumer launch later that spring.

The Oculus Rift.

Well, big in theory. While PCWorld praisedthe Oculus Rift in its reviewvirtual reality was here, and it was magical!the launch was far from perfect. The rumbling began in the run-up to the headsets release, with Rifts $600 launch price far exceeding the $250 to $500 range that Oculus higher-ups had teased repeatedly. Once it actually launched, the headset was plagued by hardware shortages and significant shipment delays, which didnt go over well at all.

But the biggest problem for the Rift was that even at launch its days already felt numberednot a vibe you want from $600 hardware. The Rift was designed primarily as a seated VR experience, with a controller in your hands. By the time it launched on March 28, enthusiasts and industry press had already spent time playing with the SteamVR-powered HTC Vive, which used made-for-VR controllers and dedicated tracking stations to enable room-scale VR experiences that let you wander around and actually touch things. After trying Vive, going back to the Rifts sedentary experience felt far less satisfying.

The HTC Vive.

And the HTC/Valve duo didnt waste any time capitalizing on its advantage. The HTC Vive launched on April 5, roughly a week after the Oculus Rift, and immediately seized the crown as PCWorlds preferred VR solution.

Despite that, we recommendpassing on the Rift and the Vive, and for very good reason. While VR can be nothing short of awe-inspiring, these first-gen products also have some obvious flaws.

Man, virtual-reality headsets are expensive.

Oculus Rift with its Touch controllers.

Thats to be expected with bleeding-edge hardware, but $600 for the Oculus Rift or $800 for the HTC Vive puts them firmly in the one percent category. The recent release of Oculuss $200 Touch controllers drove the cost of a full Rift setup to the Vives level, or even more if you want kinda-sorta room-scale experiences and need an extra sensor. VR experiences tend to be high-priced and relatively short-lived compared to traditional PC games. This is not a cheap hobby.

That priciness was exacerbated by the need to connect these headsets to a pretty powerful PCthat cost of which was roughly $1,000 to $1,500 at the time of the headsets' launch. Fortunately, while the Vive and Rift themselves have stayed at the same lofty prices, the cost of a computer to run them absolutely plunged as the year carried on.

The plunge began with the launch of AMDs Radeon RX 480, which revolutionized whats possible with a $200 graphics card. Before its release, VR-capable graphics cards cost nearly twice that amount. (Nvidia quickly followed suit with the $250 GeForce GTX 1060.) Jumping forward two full technological generations paid major dividends for graphics cards.

The AMD Radeon RX 480.

Software tricks helped democratize VR just as much. At the Oculus Connect conference in October, the company revealed a new feature dubbed Asynchronous Spacewarp that used technical tricks to drive the barrier to entry for Rift VR way, way downall the way to an AMD AM4 or Intel Core i3-6100 processor, and a GeForce GTX 960 graphics card. In March, a Rift-ready PC cost at least $1,000; after Oculus Connect, Rift-ready PCs started at $500, and as I write this theres a Best Buy promotion offering a full PC and the Rift itself for $999.

Hot damn, prices plunged fast. And another pesky PC VR problem is already in everybodys sights.

The HTC Vive and Oculus Rift both drive very high-fidelity gaming experiences, and headsets need to be physically tethered to your PC in order to work. That kind of sucks. Its all too easy to trip over the thick cables while youre wandering around the room ensconced in a virtual world, or to twist and turn so much that the cord eventually jerks your head back.

HPs Omen X VR PC.

That (sometimes literal) headache inspired the birth of a whole new class of gaming PCsones that you wear on your back. Youre still wired up, sure, but those wires travel with you instead of getting tangled between your feet. Zotac, MSI, Alienware, and HP have all revealed backpack PCs of various designs, though none have actually hit the street yet.

The standalone Oculus Santa Cruz prototype.

As nifty as they are, however, backpack PCs feel like a stopgap solutiona fix to a problem that will disappear when more robust wireless display technologies or more potent mobile graphics arrive. And you can already see that wireless future on the horizon, with Oculus testing a fully self-contained mobile Rift prototype pictured above and HTC backing a $220 add-on kit that makes the Vive wireless.

While powerful PC-based VR experiences may be tethered, the more modest world of phone-driven mobile VR has already left cords far behind.

Googles Daydream View.

Samsungs Gear VR headset (which only works with Samsung Galaxy phones) blazed the Android VR trail, while Googles low-cost Cardboard brought it to the masses. In late 2016 Google stomped into the Gear VRs turf with Daydream VR, an Android-centric initiative that brings premium mobile VR to the entire ecosystem rather than Samsungs phones alone.

Daydream centers on a trio of pillars: powerful phones, Daydream VR headsets, and Android Nougats new VR features. While Googles own Daydream View headset and Pixel phone kicked off the program, Daydream isnt its alone. HTC, LG, Xiaomi, Huawei, ZTE, Asus, Alcatel, Lenovo, and yes, even Samsung have pledged to create Daydream mobile devices.

A Microsoft rendering shows simulated HoloLens apps.

Microsofts HoloLens is kind of a mix of PC and mobile VR, while also a different beast entirely. Its a portable, fully self-contained system that doesnt need to connect to a PC, but HoloLens utilizes augmented reality, not virtual reality. Virtual reality plops you in fully realized virtual worlds; augmented reality, as the name implies, augments the real world with overlaid objects, such as a Minecraft world sprouting from your coffee table or a Skype video chat appearing on your wall.

Microsoft still hasnt revealed details about when (or if) HoloLens will be available to consumer users, or how much it would cost, but deep-pocketed developers and enterprise users can already pick up the headset for a cool $3,000.

Pricey HoloLens headset arent Microsofts only foray into VR. The massive Windows 10 Creators Update next spring will bake augmented reality features much, much more deeply into the flagship PC operating system, and itll be accompanied by an army of new Windows 10 VR headsets at launchheadsets that will start at just $300 and run on surprisingly modest PCs. Meanwhile, Intel and Microsofts Project Evo partnership aims to change how computers think, see, and hear, with a specific goal of driving mixed reality forward.

Players enjoy a VR experience at HTCs Viveland arcade in Taiwan.

If 2016 was birth of a virtual-reality revolution, look for 2017 to be a year of VR refinement. Witness the new, Oculus Touch-esque Vive controllers that Valve already began to tease, and bookmark the holiday 2017 launch of Microsofts powerful Xbox Scorpio consolewhich could very possibly leverage the Windows 10 Creators Update to run the Oculus Rift or Windows 10 VR headsets as a counter to Sonys surprisingly okay PlayStation VR.

Next year, VR games should only get better as developers gain more experience... if they can navigate the complicated world of consumer expectationsand discover what people really want from the medium, that is. The cost of VR-capable PCs will only keep going down. Expect augmented reality to continue making inroads in car tech. The Vive and Rift may even get price cuts! Heck, with enough advances, 2017 may be the year PCWorld officially recommends you buy a VR headset.

Or it could all come crashing down like previous virtual-reality attempts. (Remember Sega VR?) Living on the bleeding edge may be expensive and exciting, but its not always a sure betthough with so many of techs biggest names spending billions on virtual reality, its hard to imagine this latest push fizzling completely. Time will tell.

See the rest here:

Virtual reality, one year out: What went right, what didn ...

The NBA is upping its game, giving fans a whole new perspective. Thanks to virtual reality technology, fans who might never have a chance to get to an NBA game can now feel like theyre in the stands, or even courtside.

All you need is a subscription to the NBA League Pass, a virtual reality headset, and the free app NextVR on your smartphone.

CBS News correspondent Dana Jacobson gave the technology a try.

I mean, the players are like, there. I should be touching them but Im not, Jacobson said. Its so clear. I dont know how to describe it. Its just unreal.

Play Video

Google released virtual versions of festive NYC holiday displays. The "window wonderland" gives people a glimpse into the festive displays throug...

Traditionally, sport has been watched on a flat screen and now for the first time in history, we take you inside the screen in a way that youve never been able to stream content, said Danny Keens, vice president of content at NextVR -- NBA Digitals partner in a weekly virtual reality broadcast.

We cant just be different from traditional television; we have be better than television and we cant just be different from being at the game, Keens said. We have to be better than being at the game.

What was it like the first time you watched that full broadcast with the NextVR technology? Jacobson asked Jeff Marsilio, who heads the venture for the NBA.

I was nervous and then I was really excited as I saw it really come together, said Marsilio. We sat the camera at a courtside table and just you know, filmed -- no real production, nothing more than just filming and capturing. But when we watched the experience, we were blown away.

But to broadcast a game each week, the league realized it needed to do more.

Its not enough to simply put the camera down and walk away, Marsilio said. What weve discovered is you really do need the context that you get from some of the more traditional things that we see in television.

That means an entire broadcast crew -- up to eight unmanned cameras with 180-degree views -- are set up throughout the arena, including one on the stanchion of each basket and one center court on the scorers table.

CBS News

And this is actually your right eye, and this is your left eye, Keens explained.

Does it combine in my brain? Jacobson asked about the headset.

Yeah it combines actually in the VR Headset. And so that gives you the depth of 3D because each one is slightly off, and in the headset, it puts it back together and it gives you this sense of a 3D world, Keens said.

One camera is also positioned at a stanchion underneath a basket. Tickets are not available for the seats there.

Theres no ticket for that on the basket position. Just in last weeks game, there was a moment when LeBron [James] was running down the court right at you and you feel like, Oh man, hes coming at me. And the hair raises on your arms. Its pretty exciting, Marsilio said.

From a designated announce team, to the way a game is cut and even the graphics you see, once the headset goes on, its all designed to keep fans engaged.

There is no multi-tasking, there is no Facebook, no Twitter, theres no checking emails, theres no sending a text message, Keens said. So you become fully engaged in the content in a way that youve never been engaged. So youre 100 percent committed to watching the game.

The league is not releasing specific numbers, but told CBS News people are watching the VR games. As for whats next, both the NBA and NextVR said the technology is rapidly improving so they expect the quality of games and the number of broadcasts to grow.

See the rest here:

NBA broadcasts games in virtual reality with NextVR ...

Virtual reality (VR) is the name for computer technology that makes a person feel like they are somewhere else. It uses software to produce images, sounds and other sensations to create a different place, so that a user feels like he or she is really part of this other place. That other place can be a real place (to take a tour in another country, for instance) or imaginary (playing a game).

The technology to do this needs special display screens or projectors and other devices. Often the picture will change when the user moves their head, they may be able to "walk" through this virtual space, and to see things in that space from different directions, and maybe move things in that space. Special gloves that create a feeling like you touched something can help make it seem more real.

This is different than augmented reality, which shows the real place that a person is in, but changes or adds to it. Pokmon Go is an example of augmented reality.

View original post here:

Virtual reality - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Weve just updated the VMware TCO Comparison Calculator to help customers see the true Total Cost of Ownership differences between VMware and Microsoft. Its easy to use just enter the basic parameters for your virtual infrastructure or private cloud environment, such as the number of VMs, type of servers and storage, and the product edition or features you need. The calculator will generate a complete TCO analysis that includes all the necessary elements of capital and operational expenses.

We created the TCO Comparison Calculator after hearing from existing and prospective VMware customers who were being told that alternative solutions based on Hyper-V would be much less expensive, or even free. The calculator totals cost elements that our competition leaves out of their oversimplified comparisons, such as: the system administrator labor costs to operate the environment (the largest component of TCO and one that independent testing shows to be much lower for VMware); effects of VM density (where VMware has an advantage according to analysts like Gartner); 247 phone support; and the need for third-party software to fill feature gaps.

When all those cost elements are combined, the VMware TCO Comparison Calculator shows that VMware solutions, ranging from a small business virtual infrastructure built with vSphere Essentials to a full-featured large enterprise private cloud based on vCloud Suite Enterprise, have the lowest TCO often by substantial margins.

When we updated the calculator, we saw that the VMware TCO advantage increased for some important reasons.

Another important enhancement weve made to the calculator is local currency support. Users can select USD, AUD, EUR, GBP, or JPY and the calculator will apply VMware and Microsoft list prices from those geographies.

This example from the VMware TCO Comparison Calculator shows that the 3-year TCO for a 500-VM environment built with vSphere with Operations Management Enterprise Plus will be 33% less than a comparable solution based on Microsoft Windows Server Hyper-V and System Center.

Our customers in the trenches running enterprise virtual infrastructures often tell us they know VMware offers the best and most cost effective solution, but they need help making the case for selecting VMware with purchasing managers or CFOs that have heard from other vendors claiming to be less expensive. If you find yourself in a similar position, use the VMware TCO Comparison Calculator to arm yourself with solid proof that VMware provides the lowest total costs.

While the operating assumption is that the OpenStack framework works best on open source components such as KVM, a just completed study by Principled Technologies and commissioned by VMware showed otherwise. Tests showed remarkably higher performance and substantially reduced costs when using OpenStack with VMware technology including vSphere when compared to OpenStack with Red Hat components.

In the study, OpenStack services were used to provision and manage the test configurations. The study equipment was identical except when published recommendations mandated a change. The test results showed:

The study recognized two trends in enterprise computing:

VMware innovations are helping customers get enterprise-class performance when exploring the OpenStack framework as a platform for large-scale application deployment. Among these innovations, the study showed that VMware Virtual SAN played an important role in providing performance advantages. Among the most significant findings related to VMware Virtual SAN, the study noted:

For the following tables, please refer to the full study for the complete test methodology and equipment setup.

Figure 1: The amount of YCSB (Yahoo Cloud Serving Benchmark) OPS achieved by the two solutions. Higher numbers are better.

Figure 2: The amount of IOPS achieved by the two solutions. Higher numbers are better. The workload was 70/30 R/W mix, random, and 4K block size.

Cost Comparison

The study showed that running OpenStack on VMware components required less hardware. Using VMware vSphere with Virtual SAN also lowered software costs. In total the study showed the 3 year costs were 26 percent lower. Because each OpenStack deployment and environment is different and support engagements vary widely from installation to installation, the costs of implementing the OpenStack framework were not included for either the VMware or the Red Hat platform.

Figure 3: Projected three-year costs for the two solutions. Lower numbers are better.

The study concludes:

In our testing, the VMware vSphere with Virtual SAN solution performed better than the Red Hat Storage solution in both real world and raw performance testing by providing 53 percent more database OPS and 159 percent more IOPS. In addition, the vSphere with Virtual SAN solution can occupy less datacenter space, which can result in lower costs associated with density. A three-year cost projection for the two solutions showed that VMware vSphere with Virtual SAN could save your business up to 26 percent in hardware and software costs when compared to the Red Hat Storage solution we tested.

As an enterprise customer, you have choices when it comes to implementing an OpenStack framework. Your selections will impact the performance and overall cost of your scale out infrastructure. With this study, VMware has demonstrated significant performance gains and cost savings in an OpenStack environment.

Read the full study here.

Amazon recently launched a new version of their Total Cost of Ownerships (TCO) Calculator that compares VMware on-premises solutions to Amazon Web Services (AWS) offerings. Our many customers choose us as their infrastructure platform and stay with us because we provide the best value. The Amazon calculator tries to create a different perception by using biased and inaccurate assumptions.

Stacking the DeckObviously

Amazon claims their calculator provides an apples-to-apples comparison, but in reality, it doesnt come close to doing so. Their calculator contains biased assumptions regarding VMwares TCO, which inflate the costs of an on-premises cloud and underestimate the true costs of using a public cloud solution.

For instance, Amazons calculator:

Another Take on VMware vs. AWS TCO:VMwares Own TCO Calculations

We decided to take a look at how costs might look using our math. The following is a VMware version of the TCO comparison against AWS. It compares costs associated with running conventional workloads on AWS and VMware infrastructure.

Conventional Workloads TCO Comparison

In a separate VMware TCO comparison calculation for a 100 VM environment, VMware TCO is $394K compared to AWSs $487K over a four-year period. This represents a 21% cost savings when choosing VMware.

This comparison uses the following 100 VMs for AWS:

Note that for this sample environment, the calculations assumed licenses for vSphere with Operations Management (vSOM) Standard, which offer more features and functionality than that of AWS and contain the features a customer truly needs for this scale environment. There are also additional AWS fees for things such as: data transfer, IP addresses, service monitoring, CloudWatch, etc. which are not captured in this TCO, but are a necessary part of running an application on AWS.

Conclusion

Clearly the AWS TCO Calculator does not represent a fair, apples-to-apples portrayal of the costs of an on-premises solution. Amazons calculator is underestimating AWS costs and overstating VMware costs. The costs of AWS instances are not the only factor to consider when choosing where to host workloads. Designing for AWS requires developer teams to significantly redesign their applications to account for the limitations and the quality of AWS infrastructure. With VMware, you have access to cost-effective, highly automated, secure infrastructure with a level of control and quality that provides superior value to IT and business units.

With the addition of vCloud Hybrid Service (vCHS), VMware now offers customers a public cloud option with faster time to value and the ability to add or reduce capacity dynamically through the use of hybrid, off-premises data centers. The combination of on-premises vSphere or vCloud Suite infrastructure with cloud-based infrastructure hosted on vCloud Hybrid Services or a vCloud Powered partner clearly provides the best hybrid cloud experience. With infrastructure running on a common technology platform (vSphere) and integrations with existing tools like vCenter, vCenter Operations, and vCloud Automation Center, VMware customers get all the benefits of a true hybrid cloud.

Edit: An earlier version of this post claimed that the VMware TCO was over a three-year time period. The correct time horizon of the VMware TCO is four years. The post has been updated to reflect this change.

The release of VMwares vSphere Data Protection 5.5 (VDP) seems to have caused a stir in the virtual backup industry. It appears we have hit a soft spot with some of the other vendors offering backup solutions for vSphere and have seen some confusing messaging coming from our partners/competitors in this market. While were certainly proud of the technology partner ecosystem built around VMware solutions I would like to take this opportunity to set the record straight on vSphere Data Protection.

Well dive in to each of these a little bit to get to the truth about vSphere Data Protection.

Some vendors claim they require no agents to do vSphere backups, even for application aware backups of Exchange, MS SQL, and SharePoint, whereas VDP Advanced does require agents for these applications.

The fact of the matter is, the vast majority of VMs do not require agents because of the way our vSphere data protection APIs work. This is the case for VDP and every other vSphere certified backup solution. But, a proper application consistent backup of Exchange, MS SQL, SharePoint and other application does require an agent, even for vendors like Veeam. Need proof? Heres a quote from page 235 of the Veeam Backup & Replication Version 7.0 User Guide:

Call me crazy, but a runtime process injected on a VM via admin credentials to do indexing and other activities on behalf of another server is the very definition of an agent. The biggest difference between VDP and Veeams agent approach is that VDPs agents are a one-time install via wizard, whereas Veeams agents are installed and uninstalled each and every time a backup job runs.

And dont forget: our VDP Advanced agents also run on physical servers so you can backup your entire Exchange, SQL, or SharePoint environment with VDP Advanced.

First things first, it really doesnt matter which backup system you choose your backup files are useless without the backup servers. Further, if youve lost your backup infrastructure Id say the odds are good youve lost other critical parts of your infrastructure as well. In cases like this, perhaps backups arent the best option for getting up and running. You might want a disaster recovery solution like our Site Recovery Manager or vCloud Hybrid Service Disaster Recovery for this situation.

But what about smaller, localized issues? What if your backup server gets wiped out? First and foremost Id recommend you use a product that includes backup replication so you always have 2nd and 3rd copies of your backups, hopefully on-site and off-site. With VDP Advanced your backups could be replicated directly to another VDP Advanced virtual appliance so you could immediately restore from the 2nd appliance no additional configuration or setup needed. (Even if vCenter is down!)

So what happens if you have your backup files but your backup server is gone? Nothing! At least not until you re-install the backup server and database and maybe some proxies and repositories so that you can actually use those files, stealing precious minutes or hours from your recovery time objective.

Even if youre using our basic version of VDP, which is included with most versions of vSphere and which does not have built-in replication, keep in mind that everything you need to protect your backups the backup files, database, everything! is contained within a single VM. Simply copy the VM to secondary storage periodically to avoid a single point of failure.

VDP Advanced includes highly efficient, secure backup data replication across any link at no additional cost. How do we do it and why dont you see some special WAN accelerator configuration inside VDP Advanced? VDP Advanced is based on EMC Avamar and uses the same enterprise-class deduplication algorithm and replication engine as Avamar. What this means to you is VDP does all the required deduplication as soon as the backups are created, across all backups stored on the appliance. No additional steps are needed to further optimize the data for WAN transfers. Plus you get the added benefit of using less storage for the primary backups so you save money on your overall backup solution!

Instant Recovery is the hot marketing item in the backup world (its kind of a boring world). Strategies for restoring data quickly is a topic Id like to explore further in a more detailed article so we can look at how wed approach some common scenarios with VDP. For now I want to say this about instant recovery: the feature looks good in the brochure, but instant recovery techniques from nearly every vendor end up with VMs that are pinned to a single host, running from your backup storage, with IO shuttled through some sort of proxy VM. Add it all up and youre left with a significant performance and usability hit to the recovered VMs. If you later decide to move that VM from backup storage to production, it often requires multiple steps to move and rehydrate the VMDKs and then rebuild them from the delta disks that were written while the instant VM ran.

In contrast, VDP Advanced can utilize Changed Block Tracking to restore a VM directly on full production storage. This means only the blocks that have changed since the selected restore point will be restored. As a result, restore times can be dramatically reduced up to 6X versus traditional restore methods according to the VDP Advanced study performed by ESG Labs.

This myth is just plain wrong. VDP Advanced does include automated backup verification. And were not just talking about verifying a file checksum. A VDP backup verification job can be created to automatically restore and verify the full functionality of a VM on a scheduled basis, e.g., once per week. Results of the backup verification jobs are reported in the VDP Advanced user interface and email reports so that administrators have the utmost confidence that important VMs can definitely be restored when needed.

Weve designed VDP and VDP Advanced to offer a great value to our customers, who often struggle to setup a good backup system and cannot afford the high price of some of the enterprise backup solutions. We think VDP excels in many areas but especially with features like:

As I said at the start, were very proud of the ecosystem of partners weve built around vSphere, even those we compete with at times. While we at VMware focus on building products that are better together we realize that no single product will fit every customers needs and at the end of the day its you the customer who has to navigate the maze of features and jargon and figure out the solution thats best for you. I hope this article makes that task a little bit easier.

If youve had a chance to use the VMware TCO Comparison Calculator, you know that it factors in all the elements of a proper Total Cost of Ownership analysis to compare the true cost of building a virtual infrastructure on our vSphere and vSphere with Operations Management products to the cost of building a similar infrastructure on Microsofts Cloud OS their name for Windows Server Hyper-V and System Center. [VMware has an even more detailed ROI/TCO Calculator to show the financial savings of virtualization and private cloud vs. physical infrastructure.]

The results are eye-opening for many users who have seen the comparisons from our competitors that consider only the Windows operating system and virtualization software license costs. Including all the TCO elements shown above makes it very clear that the cost of virtualization software is just a small part of the overall TCO for a virtualized infrastructure.

Weve just updated the TCO Comparison Calculator with two important new features:

There are three key cost elements that work strongly in VMwares favor that show up in the calculator results:

A quick example from the VMware TCO Comparison Calculator shows just how much of an impact those VMware cost savings have. This example shows the two-year TCO for an infrastructure of 1,000 VMs on vSphere with Operations Management Enterprise Plus (our highest edition) vs. Microsoft Windows Server Hyper-V and System Center.

You can see that VMware delivers 30% lower TCO from its lower OpEx costs and features that preclude the need for third-party add-ons.

Heres an example showing that the two-year TCO for upgrading a 1000-VM vSphere Enterprise environment to our full-featured vCloud Suite Enterprise platform comes in 36% less than if that sameinfrastructure were migrated to Microsofts Cloud OS.

Whether youre new to virtualization and considering a greenfield server consolidation project or a long-time vSphere user weighing your options for a private cloud upgrade, give the VMware TCO Comparison Calculator a try youll see that you can get the best for less.

There is much rhetoric these days about cloud wars. Beyond the rhetoric, the hype is there for a reason: the value of hybrid cloud environments is becoming real, and the market opportunity even more real. We are proud to serve our customers as a leading provider of virtualization software and cloud infrastructure. And were equally proud of what our customers are achieving with VMware as a partner.

You can take a break from the hype cycle by checking out the rest of the blog post by Bogomil Balkansky,Sr. Vice President, CloudInfrastructure Platform here.

With the announcement of vSphere with Operation Management this week, it is truly exciting to not only see the advancements of management being tied so closely to the vSphere platform, but also bring our customers closer to the vision of the Software Defined Data Center. As we see both the vSphere platform mature along with our customers use of it, we also see an evolution of VMware operations management accelerating and leveraging the value of the platform in our customers environments.

This new offering signifies a number a key aspects in the evolution of virtualization and cloud management:

First, our customers have experienced and expressed the need for accurate and automated solutions to proactively manage performance and capacity and vCenter Operations Manager, as part of vSphere with Operations Management, has delivered. Leveraging a foundation of patented self-learning analytics, vCenter Operations Manager delivers the most comprehensive, scalable and automated management solution for vSphere. Utilizing the vSphere health model, vSphere with Operations Management further extrapolates and presents data for managing performance and capacity more effectively than any other current or promised solutions.

We invested in vCenter Operations to support our large infrastructure of 500 VMs and 40 hosts. It has enabled us to predict capacity needs and to easily locate any performance issues.

Eric Krejci , Systems Specialist, EPFL

Second, vSphere with Operations Management leverages true automated operations for vSphere environments. This VMware innovation reduces the administrative overhead and inaccuracies from tools using static thresholds (manual thresholds set for individual metrics) while analyzing all (not just a handful) of relevant vSphere performance metrics to ensure there are no performance or capacity blind spots. Furthermore, to automatically correlate and expose the bottlenecks (with associated metrics) along with best practice remediation, vSphere with Operations Management ensures accurate management alignment that supports and further leverages our customers investment in VMware.

Advanced analytics easily identifies and shows root-cause to problem areas

Finally, vSphere with Operations Management raises the bar by redefining what operations management needs to be in todays dynamic infrastructure. Cloud customers simply were not finding effective solutions from their traditional, legacy IT management frameworks, or even 3rd party tools that are built on the same premise. Even when considering other hypervisor / cloud products, the management ecosystem is at the heart of truly enabling the platform. VMware vSphere with Operations Management clearly demonstrates the next step in simplicity of both cost and value through reliable, proven and innovative technology.

Going to VMware Partner Exchange 2013? Be sure to check out these sessions on VMware management and the competition: MGMT1238, MGMT1369 & CI1523.

Twitter: @benscheerer

The idea of introducing multiple hypervisors into your data center and managing them seamlessly from a single tool might sound appealing, but in reality, products claiming that ability today cant deliver on that promise. You introduced virtual infrastructure to simplify operational tasks for your IT staff, so why would you want to handicap them with a management approach that adds costs and complexity? A study recently completed by the Edison Group and commissioned by VMware shows that is exactly what you will be doing if you introduce Microsoft System Center 2012 Virtual Machine Manager (SCVMM) with the hopes of using it to manage VMware vSphere hosts.

Microsoft touts SCVMM as a heterogeneous management tool with the ability to manage VMware vSphere and Citrix XenServer hosts in addition to those running Hyper-V. IT managers might find Microsofts claims that they can, easily and efficiently manage applications and services across multiple hypervisors, enticing. The suggestion by Microsoft is clear: dont worry about complicating the jobs of your system administrators by introducing Hyper-V into a VMware environment because SCVMM provides a do-everything single-pane-of-glass control panel. Are their claims true? Can Microsoft SCVMM really let you operate a multi-hypervisor data center without the cost penalties that come with staffing, training for, and operating across the isolated islands of management that would otherwise exist?

To find the truth behind Microsofts promises, we asked Edison Group to test VMware vSphere in their labs using both vCenter and the vSphere Client and Microsoft SCVMM 2012 to complete a set of 11 typical management tasks. Edisons analysts used their Comparative Management Cost Study methodology to measure the labor costs and administrative complexity of each task. The tasks Edison Group studied were those that any vSphere administrator performs on a regular basis, such as provisioning new vSphere hosts, deploying VMs, monitoring system health and performance, configuring virtual networks, etc.

Higher costs and complexity when managing vSphere with SCVMM 2012

The results were clear and conclusive managing VMware vSphere is much more efficient using vCenter than when attempting to manage it with Microsoft SCVMM 2012. To complete the 11 typical management tasks Edison Group tested took 36% less time and required 41% fewer steps using vCenter and the vSphere client compared to SCVMM 2012.

Figure 1 Managing vSphere using vCenter takes 36% less administrator time than with SCVMM 2012

Figure 2 vCenter management of vSphere requires 41% fewer steps than SCVMM 2012

Jack of some trades, master of none

Its not hard to understand why vCenter and the vSphere Client make life so much easier for vSphere administrators. As my colleague Randy Curry wrote, Microsoft SCVMM 2012 just doesnt do a very good job of enabling vSphere management. SCVMMs incomplete or missing support for even basic tasks forces administrators to constantly jump over to the vSphere Client to get any real work done. Microsoft was apparently more interested in being able to check the box for multi-hypervisor management when they built SCVMM 2012 than they were in providing a truly usable vSphere management tool. As Edison Group said in their report (available here or here):

Managing hypervisors using tools that are not specifically optimized to control all aspects of their operations risks impairing reliability, elegance, and ease of management, with potential adverse impact on the bottom line. Creating a truly successful solution requires deep integration and expertise in development.

Adding different hypervisors? Proceed with caution.

Multi-hypervisor IT shops are a trend that may be growing, but dont expect a simple single-pane-of-glass management experience if you bring in a different hypervisor. The testing by Edison Group clearly shows that management costs and complexity will be substantially higher if you attempt to use a partially implemented heterogeneous management tool like Microsoft SCVMM 2012 to manage a vSphere infrastructure. We at VMware realize that operating a 100% vSphere environment is not always possible and weve recently introduced our own multi-hypervisor management features with vCenter Multi-Hypervisor Manager and vCloud Automation Center to accommodate those cases. Rather than positioning those solutions as enablers of permanent multi-hypervisor environments, were offering them to help our customers manage heterogeneous pools of infrastructure until they can migrate their workloads to a VMware platform where they can benefit from our exclusive software-defined datacenter capabilities.

If youre weighing possible benefits of introducing a second hypervisor, you may want to take the advice of Gartners Chris Wolf and stick to a single hypervisor unless you want maintain and pay for separate islands of management:

Multi-hypervisor has serious tradeoffs if its the end goal for the production server workloads in your data center. Additional hypervisors for one-off siloed initiatives is often practical, but becoming less standardized in your data centers is anything but efficient.

Chris Wolf repeated that message at a session on heterogeneous virtualization we attended at the recent Gartner Data Center Conference. In fact, he stated there that no Gartner clients have succeeded in adopting a single-pane-of-glass multi-hypervisor approach. Thats refreshingly frank advice that should be heeded by anyone lured by Microsofts promises of multiple hypervisor nirvana.

Microsoft has published a blog article claiming that VMwares Cost-Per-Application Calculator admits VMwares costs are higher.

VMwares Cost-Per-Application calculator is designed to rebut Microsoft claims that Hyper-V is five to ten times cheaper.It shows that the acquisition cost with even VMwares highest edition vSphere Enterprise Plus is at parity with Microsoft and actually beats Microsoft for most configurations. For example, the blog shows a comparison result from the VMware calculator using servers that have 64GB RAM. A comparison using servers with 128GB RAM, the more common configuration, shows that the total cost with VMware is at parity with Microsoft.

Read more:

Virtual Reality - Setting the Record Straight One Post at ...

A virtual reality headset provides immersive virtual reality for the wearer. VR headsets are widely used with computer games but they are also used in other applications, including simulators and trainers. They comprise a stereoscopic head-mounted display (providing separate images for each eye), stereo sound, and head motion tracking sensors[1] (which may include gyroscopes, accelerometers, structured light systems,[2] etc.). Some VR headsets also have eye tracking sensors[3] and gaming controllers.

An early VR headset, the Forte VFX1, was announced at CES in 1994. The VFX-1 has stereoscopic displays, 3-axis head-tracking, and stereo headphones.[4] Sony, another pioneer, released the Glasstron in 1997, which has an optional positional sensor, allowing the wearer to view the surroundings, with the perspective moving as his head moves, giving a deep sense of immersion. These VR headsets gave MechWarrior 2 players a new visual perspective of seeing the battlefield from inside the cockpit of their craft. However, these early headsets failed commercially due to their limited technology[5][6] and were described by John Carmack as like "looking through toilet paper tubes".[7]

In 2012, a crowdfunding campaign began for a VR headset known as Oculus Rift; the project was led by several prominent video game developers, including John Carmack[5] who later became the company's CTO.[8] In March 2014, the project's parent company Oculus VR was acquired by Facebook for US$2 billion.[9] The final consumer-oriented release of Oculus Rift began shipping on 28 March 2016.[10]

In March 2014, Sony demonstrated a prototype headset for PlayStation 4,[11] which was later named PlayStation VR.[12] In 2014, Valve Corporation demonstrated some headset prototypes,[13] which lead to a partnership with HTC to produce the Vive, which focuses on "room scale" VR environments that users can naturally navigate within and interact with.[14] The Vive was planned for a release in April 2016.[15] and PlayStation VR later in 2016.[16]

Virtual reality headsets and viewers have also been designed for smartphones. Unlike headsets with integrated displays, these units are essentially enclosures which a smartphone can be inserted into. VR content is viewed from the screen of the device itself through lenses acting as a stereoscope, rather than using dedicated internal displays. Google released a series of specifications and associated DIY kits for virtual reality viewers known as Google Cardboard; these viewers are capable of being constructed using low-cost materials, such as cardboard (hence the naming). Samsung Electronics parterned with Oculus VR to co-develop the Samsung Gear VR (which is only compatible with recent Samsung Galaxy devices), while LG Electronics developed a headset with dedicated displays for its LG G5 smartphone known as LG 360 VR.[17][18][19][20]

Virtual reality headsets have significantly higher requirements for latencythe time it takes from a change in input to have a visual effectthan ordinary video games.[21] If the system is too sluggish to react to head movement, then it can cause the user to experience virtual reality sickness, a kind of motion sickness.[22] According to a Valve engineer, the ideal latency would be 7-15 milliseconds.[23] A major component of this latency is the refresh rate of the display,[22] which has driven the adoption of displays with a refresh rate from 90Hz (Oculus Rift and HTC Vive) to 120Hz (PlayStation VR).[16]

The graphics processing unit (GPU) also needs to be more powerful to render frames more frequently. Oculus cited the limited processing power of Xbox One and PlayStation 4 as the reason why they are targeting the PC gaming market with their first devices.[24]

A common way to reduce the perceived latency[25] or compensate for a lower frame rate,[26] is to take an (older) rendered frame and morph it according to the most recent head tracking data just before presenting the image on the screens. This is called asynchronous reprojection[27] or "asynchronous time warp" in Oculus jargon.[28]

PlayStation VR synthesizes "in-between frames" in such manner, so games that render at 60 fps natively result in 120 updates per second.[16][26] SteamVR (HTC Vive) will also use "interleaved reprojection" for games that cannot keep up with its 90Hz refresh rate, dropping down to 45 fps.[29]

The simplest technique is applying only projective transformation to the images for each eye (simulating rotation of the eye). The downsides are that this approach cannot take into account the translation (changes in position) of the head. And the rotation can only happen around the axis of the eyeball, instead of the neck, which is the true axis for head rotation. When applied multiple times to a single frame, this causes "positional judder", because position is not updated with every frame.[25][30][31]

A more complex technique is positional time warp, which uses pixel depth information from the Z-buffer to morph the scene into a different perspective. This produces other artifacts because it has no information about faces that are hidden due to occlusion[30] and cannot compensate for position-dependent effects like reflections and specular lighting. While it gets rid of the positional judder, judder still presents itself in animations, as timewarped frames are effectively frozen.[31] Support for positional time warp was added to the Oculus SDK in May 2015.[32]

Because virtual reality headsets stretch a single display across a wide field of view (up to 110 for some devices according to manufacturers), the magnification factor makes flaws in display technology much more apparent. One issue is the so-called screen-door effect, where the gaps between rows and columns of pixels become visible, kind of like looking through a screen door.[33] This was especially noticeable in earlier prototypes and development kits,[6] which had lower resolutions than the retail versions.

The lenses of the headset are responsible for mapping the up-close display to a wide field of view,[34][35] while also providing a more comfortable distant point of focus. One challenge with this is providing consistency of focus: because eyes are free to turn within the headset, it's important to avoid having to refocus to prevent eye strain.[36]

The lens introduce distortion and chromatic aberration, which are corrected in software.[34]

Virtual reality headsets are being currently used as means to train medical students for surgery. It allows them to perform essential procedures in a virtual, controlled environment. Students perform surgeries on virtual patients, which allows them to acquire the skills needed to perform surgeries on real patients.[37] It also allows the students to revisit the surgeries from the perspective of the lead surgeon.[38]

Traditionally, students had to participate in surgeries and often they would miss essential parts. But, now surgeons have been recording surgical procedures and students are now able to watch whole surgeries again from the perspective of lead surgeons with the use of VR headsets, without missing essential parts. Students can also pause, rewind, and fast forward surgeries.[38]

See the article here:

Virtual reality headset - Wikipedia

Sept. 18, 2016 10:06 p.m. ET

Get ready for your next conference callin virtual reality.

With equipment for virtual-reality viewing now on the consumer market, public tech companies and venture capitalists are exploring possible applications in everything from videogames to medicine. And some are betting that virtual-reality headsets could be the next big thing in business-meeting software, upending the dreaded videoconference call.

Some of virtual realitys potential as a meeting and collaboration tool is suggested in a video recently recorded at the NYU Media Research Lab. In the video, lab researchers strap on Samsung SSNHZ0.00% Gear VR headsets with antler-like sensors attached to thegoggles. The headsets usher the researchers into a virtual-realityenvironment in which they see digital avatars of themselves movingaround a simulated environment. Soon, using hand-held electronicwands, the researchers are drawing 3-D models together.

Ken Perlin, a computer-science professor at New York University anddirector of the research lab, has been studying collaboration inthe virtual world for the past two years, attempting to understandhow virtual reality might change societyincluding the workplace.

Of course were going to embrace any technology that makes us feel more connected, Prof. Perlin says.

A global survey of attitudes toward technology in the workplace suggests he may be right. The survey, in a report from Dell Inc., Intel Corp. INTC -0.05% and consultants Penn Schoen Berland, found that 57% ofemployees around the world prefer face-to-face conversations withcolleagues. But more than half said that better communicationstechnology could make such interactions obsolete in the future.Millennials particularly were open to using virtual- andaugmented-reality products at work, with 77% saying they would tryit.

Jeremy Bailenson, the founding director of Stanford Universitys VirtualHuman Interaction Lab, says business calls using virtual-realitytechnology can offer many benefits over videoconferencing.

VR meetings will allow for nuanced nonverbal communicationproper eye contact, subtle cues such as interpersonal distance, and eventually virtual touch and smell (when desired), Prof. Bailenson writes in a recent email.

For most companies investing in the medium, virtual-reality meetings are still experimental. Employees from the Bank of Ireland BIR 0.00 % and National Grid NGG -0.16% PLC, the British utility, have tweeted about their earlysampling of virtual-reality meeting software. Mike Harlick, head ofthe Bank of Ireland Worklab, said to him it felt like the futureof collaboration.

Mr. Harlick told The Wall Street Journal that his firm has been experimenting with several virtual conferencing centers. He said he doesnt see virtual reality replacing video calls, but that it provides functions that other office collaboration tools do not offer. He said he thinks it will help his team be more effective in how they communicate.

In the context of office meetings you now have a whole virtual environment where you can co-create and interact, he wrote in an email. So you may have white boards on one wall, a shared document on another.

The National Grid employee who tweeted, David Goldsby, said a team he presented to was seriously impressed by the technology. However, he said the Wi-Fi in their hotel presented challenges. The company didn't respond to a request for comment.

Still, for many companies, experts say virtual-reality meetings may offer real improvements over the typical videoconference experience.

Some of the earliest adopters are in videogaming and the virtual-reality industry itself. Neil Glenister, founder of a London-based gaming company called 232Studios, says his team has typically conducted lengthy weekly groupmeetings on Skype. But the team, he says, is tired ofvideoconferencing. It doesnt make them feel as if they are in thesame room, he says, and they have trouble seeing each others handgestures.

Instead, Mr. Glenister and his team recently tried an app called vTime, which allows people to meet in virtual environments using avatars. From a menu of possible settings, Mr. Glenister and his employees chose to meet in a simulation of outer space.

At times, he says, they struggled to focus on work-related topics because they were distracted by the planets surrounding them.

Still, he says, that sense of presence was really good. The dynamics of the calls through Skype werent as friendly.

Skype, which is owned by Microsoft Corp. MSFT -0.21% , didnt say if it has developed a virtual-realityapplication, but a spokesman says the company is testing the watersin augmented reality, a close cousin of virtual reality in which aviewer sees digital images imposed over real-world environments.Skype says it has developed an application for the HoloLens,Microsofts augmented-reality device that is currently onlyavailable to developers.

Something else that virtual reality provides that video calls typically dont: eye contact. Though theyre looking through their avatars eyes, participants in a virtual-reality meeting get the feeling they are making eye contact, says Eric Romo, chief executive of AltspaceVR Inc., a Redwood City,Calif., company that designs environments for virtual-realitymeetings using avatars. Some virtual-reality companies areexperimenting with eye-tracking technology that would allow thegoggles to better track users eye movements and convey even morerealistic eye contact.

In a typical video call, by contrast, a participant may think he or she is making eye contact, but to the other person they appear to be looking down. Instead of looking directly at each others image, you have to look into the camera for the other person to get the feeling you are looking into their eyes.

Other kinds of physical cues missing from most telecommunication may be incorporated into virtual-reality calls as well. While arms are frequently out of sight in video chats when people are sitting close to the camera, some virtual-reality headsets are able to capture arm and hand gestures that are then imitated by an avatar. Participants can get visual insights into group dynamics, as well, such as how close certain avatars stand to one another.

There are all these nonverbal cues we have physically that we dont have in [most] communication technologies except for VR, Mr. Romo says.

One of the biggest challenges today for companies creating meeting spaces in virtual reality is to make avatars that realistically capture and instantly reflect the users emotions. Some companies are putting transitional technologies, like emojis, into their virtual environments. But companies are experimenting with technologies that would allow avatars to capture facial expressions.

Another hurdle that technologists are addressing is capturing fine movements. With hand controllers, avatars can imitate simple gestures, like waving a hand. Researchers and businesses are pushing to capture finger movements.

Other impediments remain as well. Even if a person or a business invests in the equipment needed to hold a virtual-reality meeting, the equipment is still relatively rare. Others have to invest as well for meetings to be possible. Early headsets that use mobile phones also have very limited battery life, connectivity issues and can overheat.

If virtual-reality meetings do catch on, researchers are at odds over whether they will dramatically change the amount of business that people conduct in person. Prof. Bailenson says he believes that adoption of virtual-reality meetings will result in a major decline in commuting.

Prof. Perlin, meanwhile, says the impact of virtual-reality meetings will be similar to other communication technologies that have come before.

I think its important also to keep in mind when you look at historical trends, the more weve embraced new kinds of telecommunication media, things like Skype, the more weve traveled, he says. The more we feel connected to people, the more we want to physically be together.

Ms. Zakrzewski is a reporter in The Wall Street Journals San Francisco bureau. She can be reached at cat.zakrzewski@wsj.com.

More:

Virtual Reality Takes On the Videoconference - WSJ

A startup calledRendeveris working towards a future where the physical limitations many seniors face wont prevent them from traveling virtually.

The men and women at the Brookdale Senior Living Community got to try out the companystechnology. Theydont need to leave the building to take a trip to the French countryside, soar through Yosemite National Park and explore the depths of the ocean, all thanks to the power of virtual reality.

MIT graduate students Dennis Lally and Reed Hayes are pioneering the use of this technology with seniors, reports CBS News correspondent Michelle Miller.

Play Video

2016 is shaping up to be the year of virtual reality. Video games, Hollywood and media giants are embracing the technology and driving VR into th...

I feel for the people living inside these communities, that they dont have enough stimulation, Hayes said. They need to have a sense of wonder about the world again, they need to be curious, they need to be exploring. And when youre physically not able to do that by yourself, then virtual reality is a wonderful aid to provide that.

Much of the touring is done through Google Maps footage, but they also showcase 360-degree films.

Vanessa Rosenzweig has been living at the community for two years.

When I tour I ask a hundredquestions, Rosenzweig said, just like she does on actual tours in real life.

The experience is even more meaningful for seniors like Marion Keefe, who got the opportunity to return home.

Do you recognize your house? Lally asked.

Yeah. Well, wait a minute, Keefe said, putting her hands to her mouth, getting emotional. Oh, dont say that. Thats the most beautiful area in the world.

How virtual reality can change how you act toward others

You touched off her emotions. She felt something, Miller said.

Absolutely. Other people in the room felt it, Hayes said. And those were extremely powerful moments that 2D picture wont provide. It requires virtual reality, the immersive nature of it, to generate those emotions.

90 Lupin Way! Keefe exclaimed. Who did this?

In a follow-up interview, we asked Keefe about her experience, but she struggled to take us back to that precisemoment.

Play Video

Revenue from virtual and augmented reality could reach $120 billion by 2020, but what will the future of this advanced technology look like? CBS ...

What does that tell you is happening? Miller asked Lally.

Its a spark. Without us bringing her there, she wouldnt have had those memories, she wouldnt have remembered the neighborhood that she walked in and the fact that her husband worked at the back of her house, Lally said. Virtual reality allows us to really spark that new memory.

But neurologist Gayatri Devi said thatwhile virtual reality does indeed have the power to stimulate, the brain is a complex organ that benefits from real connection.

Nothing can ever replace human touch and human interaction, Devi said. It needs to be able to feel the texture of theplace, it needs to be able to smell the place, it needs to be able to taste the place.

Abdus Shakur, a chef,said hes still got many traveling days ahead of him. But he was overjoyed to virtually visit a restaurant he opened in Berlin nearly two decades ago.

Thats seriously addictive, come on! Shakur said about the virtual reality experience. I could stay there just, you know, go wherever I want, without going anywhere.

Lally and Hayes plan to start offering their service to senior communities for an upfront fee plus a monthly subscription.

Read more:

Virtual reality opens world of possibilities for seniors

What is Virtual Reality?

Virtual Reality or VR is a computer-generated environment that aspires to deliver immersive, interactive and intuitive user experiences that seem every bit as real as the physical world. VR creates a sense of realism by simulating a users physical presence within a software-created world, assisted by powerful computer hardware, software, and visual technologies.

Currently, VR requires powerful computing and graphics capabilities, advanced VR software, a camera/device that tracks your movements, and a specialized goggle-style headset or head-mounted display unit (HMD). The VR headset creates a three-dimensional effect and enhances the illusion of depth, similar to how special 3D eyeglasses create a sense of depth when viewing 3D movies, although the technology is vastly different.

LiquidVR is an AMD initiative dedicated to making VR as comfortable and realistic as possible by creating and maintaining whats known as presence a state of immersive awareness whereby situations, objects, or characters within the virtual world seem real. Guided by close collaboration with key technology and ecosystem partners, AMDs innovative LiquidVR technology enables beautifully rich and immersive VR experiences by simplifying and optimizing VR content creation, unlocking many unique AMD hardware features designed to seamlessly interplay with headsets.

AMD believes that VR has an incredible future ahead, and is committed to ensuring that people using AMD products and developers creating VR content to run on AMD products will enjoy and create the best possible VR experiences. AMDs current VR technology initiative focuses on the Three Cs of ensuring an enjoyable VR experience: content, comfort, and compatibility.

We expect a wide variety of VR devices to emerge in coming months and years. Many of these devices may represent entirely new categories, and may not initially have native support from content and operating system ecosystems. LiquidVR is designed to help make the end-to-end installation experience as intuitive as possible particularly for the display and GPU subsystem portions.

An amazing range of visual experiences are being developed by the content creators for VR, and we need a hardware and software strategy that is different than the one-size-fits-all model employed for most 2D applications. With LiquidVR, users of AMD technology can build multi-GPU and multi-core CPU systems with solutions available on the market today.

To take advantage of the benefits of AMD LiquidVR technology, users will require: a PC with a LiquidVR-compatible AMD Radeon graphics product installed, an HMD compatible with AMD GPU technologies and AMD LiquidVR technology, and a compatible AMD Catalyst graphics driver.

All Radeon GPUs based on the Graphics Core Next (GCN) architecture support the current AMD LiquidVR feature set. However, the minimum performance requirements required for the best VR experience will vary between different HMD/content platforms.

The following Radeon graphics products are recommended for use with the Oculus Rift:

Learn more

The following Radeon graphics products are recommended for use with the HTC Vive:

Learn more

We will evaluate product requirements for additional VR headsets as they become available.

Currently, VR requires powerful computing and graphics capabilities, advanced VR software, a camera/device that tracks your movements, and a specialized goggle-style headset or head-mounted display unit. A system that utilizes AMD LiquidVR technology will unlock many unique hardware features designed to seamlessly interplay with headsets to enable smooth and immersive VR experiences.

Any PC equipped with a compatible Radeon GPU can support AMD LiquidVR technology, though some VR applications may have their own minimum performance requirements. We are also working together with system builders and VR headset vendors to qualify systems that have been specifically configured to provide an optimal VR experience check amd.com/VR for up-to-date information.

AMD is working with major HMD vendors and intends to support the widest possible variety of VR products upon their commercial release. Both Oculus Rift and HTC Vive support LiquidVR technology.

VR headsets are available from various VR HMD manufacturers today. Users will need to obtain a VR headset compatible with AMDs GPU technologies and AMD LiquidVR technology. Please contact VR HMD manufacturers directly for pricing and availability.

The latest AMD Radeon Software supports AMD LiquidVR technologyfor compatible AMD Radeon graphics products on Microsoft Windows based systems. Download it here.

We are working with a wide range of leading VR game and game engine developers to take advantage of the LiquidVR feature set. However the technology is by no means limited to games the benefits are applicable to a broad spectrum of VR applications, including interactive cinema, education, simulation, telepresence, and much more.

See the original post here:

LiquidVR | Immersive Virtual Reality Technology | AMD

LEGAL DISCLAIMER: The VRTO Conference and Expo is for all ages over 13, though some demos may not accommodate minors. Tickets are non-refundable. VRTO attendance does not guarantee access to any particular demo, but rather the event as a whole.

By attending Virtual Reality Toronto Conference and Expo 2016 (aka VRTO Virtual & Augmented Reality World Conference and Expo, VRTO Con, or VRTOC) at 50 Carlton St. Toronto, Ontario, Canada and Holiday Inn Toronto Downtown Centre (the Location)on June 25th 27th, 2016, you release VRTO Conference and Expo, the Location, all of the events organizers, volunteers, employees, exhibitors, vendors and contractors from any and all liability financial or otherwise that may arise from my attendance at the above mentioned event. You are hereby aware that some people experience nausea, disorientation, motion sickness, general discomfort, headaches or other health issues when experiencing virtual reality.

Your entry signals your agreement to take full responsibility for these or any other consequences that may arise from attendance at VRTO Conference and Expo. Be aware that some content being exhibited is in an unfinished, prototype state, and may heighten the above sensations. Demo experiences are explicitly not intended for users under 13 years of age, and your entry signals your agreement to take full responsibility for any use of virtual reality or any other technologies exhibited at VRTO Conference and Expo by any minors in your care. By remaining on the premises you agree you will not pursue legal action against VRTO Conference and Expo, the Location, any of the events organizers, volunteers, employees, exhibitors, vendors, or contractors for any damages real or perceived arising from attendance at VRTO Conference and Expo. If you do not wish to be subject to the foregoing, please do not attend VRTO Conference and Expo.

Your attendance signals your irrevocable consent to, and authorization without compensation for VRTO, its successors, assigns, contractors and other film crews permitted by the VRTO to film at VRTO Conference and Expo, to use your likeness, voice, and to make video and audio recordings of your attendance at VRTO Conference and Expo. You are hereby aware of such recording, and relinquish your rights to any compensation for any release of these recordings in any media now extant or to be devised in the future. If you do not wish to be subject to the foregoing, please do not attend VRTO Conference and Expo.

Read more:

VRTO Virtual & Augmented Reality World Conference + Expo