But sitting stock still, I was so distracted by big obvious pixels. I can’t imagine trying to do real work with text at that resolution.

For me, Quest 2 is very obviously a "not there yet" product that seems to mostly appeal to kids and people who don't actually care about graphics or comfort. It's hot, battery life is bad, strapping over a pound on your face for hours at a time is not fun, and the graphics are visibly bad - even just sitting still the edges are horribly aliased and the screen door effect is massively apparent. Plus the nausea for many people, and the complete lack of spatial awareness. I will say that untethered is massively better than tethered, though, even with the graphics penalty. Quest 4 (I don't think v3 will be a big enough improvement) or whatever Apple eventually releases might actually be appealing, though.

DDR was as really great fitness app back in the late 90s, early 00s, similar experience, but it required insanely expensive hardware if you wanted to do it at home at any decent quality (rather than just a novelty for a few parties). The Quest has none of that problem (though most of your work is in your arms rather than your legs). It is also too bad Microsoft didn't go the fitness route for Kinect, that worked fairly well also in getting sore at least.

An air pressure hard pad...well...you have to buy a DDR arcade unit. Those are going for $10k+ last time I looked. Then you have to find a place to put it....

And if your definition of 'flimsy' is 'requires some maintenance every decade', note that the product we're comparing it to, the Oculus, has a lithium ion battery in it that's e-waste after less than half that time, and good luck getting spares in a market that discontinues its products every couple of years.

DDR is in this awkward space where it's either cheap and garbage, or expensive as all hell. The DDRGAME stuff, from what I've heard is somewhat pricy AND garbage.

VR as a whole still has a long way to go though, for sure. You need like 8k per eye or something crazy before you're "maxed out" on what humans can perceive IIRC.

tl;dr human vision is higher than 8k, but megapixels is not the right concept to measure it

I do agree with you that the resolution is still to low to replace screens.

I can't imagine doing real work with text too, but it's enough to be immersed in realistic worlds like hl alyx.

looks like that's getting slightly better, as long as you tether to a massive desktop to fit its massive enthusiast GPU

I also have a htc vive pro + wireless transmitter + highend pc and i don't think at all that this will replace a normal monitor setup on a table.

Why?

Because wearing a headset on your head is just cumbersome.

I don't think anyone would ever sit in any outdoor setup with a VR headset on their heads because it looks idiotic, it ruins your hair and its too expensive to let it lay around.

And at home? At home people stoped wearing pants why would they give up a good display for a headset?

This is exactly what people thought of 5+ inch phone screens, and now nobody cares.

I keep seeing ads/promos for VR with people on a train/subway in a VR headset. I hope you don't mind having the rest of your stuff taken from you while you crush it in what ever game you're playing on the subway

Real world with the AR "Killer App" - whatever that is. Google Glass will (sadly) be accepted by everyone in society eventually.

<s> Alexa/Siri: The optimal carriage for the train you are taking will stop 12 paces to your left. whoosh... screeech!

Alexa/Siri: Enter the door to board the train.

Alexa/Siri: The person seated 3 metres in front was recently given a 1 star Co-Rider review with the notes:"Loud shitty music."

Alexa/Siri: This person approaching you has been flagged for viol.... </s>

But it doesn't really matter. Ads will ruin everything. They always do.

Then, Black Mirror comes along and ruins it for everyone, because of course people will use it exactly as they proposed it could go. After seeing that, I don't want any part of it.

Is there a rule of the internet/tech/life that says for any good use, people will first take it to the dark places thereby ruining any potential good usage first?

To be clear, I'm not asking for anything. This is from their own PR that I've seen this advertised as a use case.

Not something I care about in both counts. And I don't think people care. In fact I was at a trade show this weekend where someone was playing a Q2 game and everyone looked really interested.

And messing up my hair, well I hardly have any :)

i.e. something like the hololens or spectacles

It's getting there though. Vuzix have made really nice flat AR displays for their Blade. They just don't have a clue how to sell them afaik.

Not to say that it is some kind of blissful experience, but it works reasonably well to go get a glass of water.

you gain IRL latency for reduced pixels

My prediction if this takes off: Just as in Phones right now we will see a period of mono/duopolism after which lawmakers around the world will start to decide that the public space expanded into a new field and that companies such as Meta are unfit stewards. Then laws will be written to align platforms more with whatever the local society expects. (And some people will, again, complain about that "overreach")

I am always astounded by such claims, like have you guys ever travelled outside the Western hemisphere at all?

Furthermore, the resolution on a Quest for viewing actual text for long periods of time is entirely too low, and that's not even considering the fact that it can be very difficult to get the entire virtual screen to be in focus given the fresnel lenses. What do you do your programming on, a TI 83 screen?