You can sign up to get a daily email of our articles, see the Mailing List page!
Support me on Patreon to keep GamingOnLinux (and me) alive. Funding me on Patreon allows us to have no adverts, no paywalls, no timed articles. Just good content for you to keep up with Linux gaming. Alternatively, you can support me on Paypal.
tagline-image
OpenXR is the official name of the Khronos Group's new standard for virtual reality and augmented reality. Hopefully we will see Valve and other companies move towards this instead of their own implementations.

From their news post:
QuoteWe are pleased to announce the Khronos VR Initiative has decided on the name of the upcoming open standard for virtual reality and augmented reality: OpenXR™! Comprised of a who’s-who of industry leaders, the OpenXR working group is creating an open and royalty-free standard for VR and AR applications and devices. OpenXR will encourage innovation while accelerating market growth and user adoption.

I'm glad they've done this, as the VR space is already a mess. You have SteamVR, OSVR, Oculus, Samsung Gear VR, Daydream and there's probably others.

Fragmentation like this is bad for everyone, mostly us as the consumers of these devices. Support for specific devices, locking out other devices and so on is bad for us and bad for VR's growth. Hopefully if OpenXR moves quickly it can help to fix this for us all.

Khronos already has a lot of partners like AMD, ARM, Google, Unity, Valve, NVIDIA and the list goes on. So they should hopefully have enough resources and partners to pull it off.

See their news post here.
18 Likes, Who?
Unsane 27 February 2017 at 2:54 pm UTC
This is really good news. I neither own a virtual reality headset, nor a PC capable of running one, but Khronos creating an industry-standard specification means that if I ever want to get one I'll be able to choose it based upon how good it is and not purely on what 'exclusive titles' it works with. Hopefully everyone working on the same specification also means that they can all improve it instead of re-inventing the wheel over and over again.

Also Linux support
hellscyth142 27 February 2017 at 3:20 pm UTC
As much as I like the idea, I'm reminded of something Linus used to say.

QuoteStandards are paper. I wipe my ass with paper.

I know the Krohnos group are meant to represent a lot of big players in the industry, but I can't help but feel like a lot of the people out to do VR are going to try and subvert open standards, if it means they can keep their secret sauce closed. Valve are literally trying to reserve the right to remotely brick your hardware in the EULA, and Oculus are all about that drm.

I hope the Krhonos group have a better adoption plan than just build the thing and hope it gets picked up.
meggerman 27 February 2017 at 3:26 pm UTC
Slightly on topic, but im much more excited for Augmented reality than Virtual reality. Shame that the only working examples i have seen are from Microsoft

Table top gaming could be so much more interactive. Not just local table top, but the ability to invite virtual friends to sit in your spare seats or couch too.

image
Purple Library Guy 27 February 2017 at 10:04 pm UTC
I just hope it doesn't end up with
image
lucinos 28 February 2017 at 3:25 am UTC
Purple Library GuyI just hope it doesn't end up with
image
The goals of OpenXR seem very moderate (at least as I understand for now). It does not look like trying to be "one true standard" but for the moment it seems to me something more like a useful middleware that abstracts the API. So the goal is very moderate as it does not replace the other "standards" but does not make things worse in any way. (it is not "competing"


Last edited by lucinos at 28 February 2017 at 3:27 am UTC
elmapul 28 February 2017 at 4:56 am UTC
lucinos
Purple Library GuyI just hope it doesn't end up with
image
The goals of OpenXR seem very moderate (at least as I understand for now). It does not look like trying to be "one true standard" but for the moment it seems to me something more like a useful middleware that abstracts the API. So the goal is very moderate as it does not replace the other "standards" but does not make things worse in any way. (it is not "competing"

we are already in this situation.

OSVR came to become an open source, vendor neutral standard.
SteamVR came to become an standard but its not open.
Oculus want things exclusive for then, they dont want make an interoperability standard, just be the standard by sheer marketshare.
Samsung Gear VR and Daydream i have no idea.
tuubi 28 February 2017 at 9:16 am UTC
View PC info
  • Supporter
elmapulwe are already in this situation.

OSVR came to become an open source, vendor neutral standard.
SteamVR came to become an standard but its not open.
Oculus want things exclusive for then, they dont want make an interoperability standard, just be the standard by sheer marketshare.
Samsung Gear VR and Daydream i have no idea.
This always happens with new, emerging tech. A useful technical standard simply can't be written until there is some sort of a consensus on how the technology is supposed to work.

As lucinos wrote above, OpenXR is designed to sit between the application and the different vendor implementations, not to replace them. Hopefully OpenXR will serve to facilitate software development for a wide set of consumer VR hardware, without stifling continued innovation. Because innovation is sorely needed before I'm likely to get excited about VR.
elmapul 28 February 2017 at 11:48 pm UTC
"This always happens with new, emerging tech. A useful technical standard simply can't be written until there is some sort of a consensus on how the technology is supposed to work."

that is why we have khrnnonos group to discuss and create standards, OSVR came with the same proposal, bring the industry players togheter to discuss an standard, i cant understand why we need an workgroup to discuss an standard if we are already doing that
lucinos 1 March 2017 at 3:41 am UTC
elmapul"This always happens with new, emerging tech. A useful technical standard simply can't be written until there is some sort of a consensus on how the technology is supposed to work."

that is why we have khrnnonos group to discuss and create standards, OSVR came with the same proposal, bring the industry players togheter to discuss an standard, i cant understand why we need an workgroup to discuss an standard if we are already doing that

As I understand, the goals of OSVR and OpenXR are different. OSVR is doing a "true" API (a real platform). OSVR is "competing" with the others and of course it would be good for once if an open platform wins. OpenXR on the other hand is not doing the same and is not a competitor against anyone as it only facilitates as an abstraction layer.


Last edited by lucinos at 1 March 2017 at 3:51 am UTC. Edited 3 times.
While you're here, please consider supporting GamingOnLinux on Patreon. We have no adverts, no paywalls, no timed exclusive articles. Just good, fresh content. We also accept Paypal donations! If you already are, thank you!

Due to spam you need to Register and Login to comment.


Or login with...

Popular this week
View by Category
Contact
Latest Forum Posts
Facebook