Remind me why a local device needs to connect to a remote service before it can boot up ?
This reminds me why I'l never buy one, particularly if the manufacturer can't even manage certificate renewal, its not difficult !
Oculus says it is working to fix a service outage for its Rift headset caused by an expired certificate. The company on Wednesday said it was aware of the widely-reported bug that was causing users to be unable to launch Oculus Runtime Services, a vital component needed to boot up the gaming headset. "We are aware of and [are …
Everyone: go check your certs. Right now, we'll wait. Go check them to make sure you aren't next. While you are at it, check your domain registrations as well. Go on, we'll still wait right here for you, you won't miss anything.
See? We're still here, we waited. Now set a reminder to check again just before any of your certs or domains are due to expire. Set the reminder to recur annually or even more frequently.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled cat videos...
I would instead give the advice, don't build a device that needs to contact a remote site simply to function.
"Hmm, my internet is down (not uncommon in rural Oz). Can't browse the web so I will do some VR gaming instead. Ah!'
I wasn't planning on buying one of these devices anyway, but knowing this is the case, I definitely won't be getting one. Cert expiry, DDOS, internet down, Oculus going bust, many others I haven't thought of that render your expensive pair of glasses into a paperweight.
Even Oculus saying "Nice headset you have there. Shame is something was to happen to the service it needs to run. Fancy paying some rent?"
Indeed, this is not a failure of certificate.
It's a failure of the certificate renewal process*
*Probably because their "process" was getting the current
PFY "intern" to do it and the last one didn't stay around long enough to explain to them how.
We now return you to your regularly scheduled cat videos...
Return? I never left.
Although, in my case it's live-action cat videos. No - not cats badly-dressed up as fantasy characters, more like seven-month old cat discovering the joys of winding up elderly-but-still-feisty terrier..
The other cats, being more sensible, stay well out of young cats way. Unless she corners them - in which case a pawful of claws to the face tends to dissuade her. For a short time.
I confess I was eagerly awaiting Oculus to release the incredible Rift way back in 2013. To say I was shocked and disappointed when Oculus was acquired by Mark ZuckerBorg the next year is an understatement. No, I don't do FB nor would I even consider buying hardware from them, especially a device that requires an online connection so it tracks you 24/7. Did I mention the Borg?
"Virtual Reality" is currently immersive 3D at best.
Augmented reality could be cool, seen so nice demos of ar motorcycle helmets.
But that stupid occulus thing on yer head has yet to prove its use to me.
As is often the case with new tech seems they are struggling with making it "realistic" instead of trying to find new things this tech can do that "reality" cannot.
Even if you just controlled a drone tank at your second home, at least it would give you a facility that today is not possible.
So far seems to be a game platform.
What do you expect it to do?
Let's leave aside the games - Google Maps lets you fly over 3D rendered parts of the world with raster images projected on to them. It's not the same as really flying, and the resolution is a bit low, but it's in your own room. I surely don't need to suggest architectural possibilities for this, I hope.
Rendering formulae/molecules/body parts etc. I've tried the first one - it looks impressive and useful, but I don't have the mathematical background to assess if it's truly worth it.
Letting the games in for a bit - some people love Euro Truck Simulator in VR. The non game applications are obvious.
Art/sculpting in VR - there are a number of apps for this.
This is all a step beyond what can be achieved with a 3D monitor and a decent controller.
Maybe still hype, but becoming less so.
We are already 'picking up' virtual cardio-thoracic systems and looking at them in 3D, while we would not reply on it for diagnostic purposes, the extra depth perception does add to the experience.
And yes we use the Oculus Rift for this.
The fact that the outage was not a problem is due to the fact that we don't as yet use it heavily, as one surgeon said, "we 'see' studies in 3D anyway, so it does not add a lot for us".
"So far seems to be a game platform."
VR has been around for decades, it's only been the last few years that the price has come down far enough for ordinary folk to play with it. In all those decades, the very very expensive VR equipment was mostly not used for games. If there where not actual practical applications, then they would not have spent all that money.
Sadly, no. While I do happen to believe that in the long run fancy hardware with epic price tags will continue to stay irrelevant compared to cheap and cheerful stuff like Carboard-style phone-in-a-box-streaming-video-from-your-pc, the rest of the world seems to take the opposite view: every time any game announces any "VR support" they actually mean "it will run on either Oculus or Vive and absolutely nothing else".
Oh please. It's all been solved already. The boys and girls can play their VR games back again so what's the big deal? And many of them get a 15 USD apology in their VR-wallet so it's not that Oculus don't take their responsibility. They're doing a hell of lot better that a certain fruity loopy company did with Antenna-gate in the past.
Just spoke with our signing guru, and most signing tools enable time-stamping on a signature by default; this would prevent the signature expiring when the certificate expires. The signature is checked against that point in time, whereas a non-time-stamped signature checks 'now' against the certificate's valid period. (Apologies if something has been lost in transmission.)
So the expiration is from a, by choice, non-time-stamped signature.
Now, why would a company choose for their signed software to expire?
Because even Paris would use the defaults.
+1 - we always timestamp as part of our code signing process as otherwise you get exactly this issue - when your cert expires anything signed with it won't know that the cert was valid at the point it was signed.
The only problem you sometimes get is that the main timestamping servers run by all the big CAs are notoriously flakey and completely unsupported - if they break then you just have to find another one. Not helped by the fact that Authenticode signing uses a different method of timestamping from pure RFC3161 and not all timestamp servers support both formats.
What we really need is someone to offer cheap signing certs and provide a decent reliable timestamping server. Unfortunately LetsEncrypt have said they don't want to go into that area as they would be the obvious choice...
VR systems are worth it, and light years ahead of the older technologies, but it's disappointing that they're so relentlessly Windows locked.
However, I suspect the only way they can effectively fund any of the VR headsets is through software sales, hardware sales are not sufficient, and non Windows platforms won't help with that. The Rift runtime can be configured to accept third party (free) applications, however, and there's a number available.
I have a Rift, and it quickly became clear that Windows 10 was the only platform that made sense most of the time. The Vive isn't much better, Linux support is barely functional, anything beyond Linux is non existent.
You can say that everyone should buy the Vive, but it costs two hundred quid extra and has arguably worse controllers (and possibly slightly better visuals).
Sure it's early days, the resolution is limited, and the games/apps are a little more rough than you'd expect, but being able to fly over the Earth in Google Maps, look at mathematical equations plotted in 3D and annotate them in VR space, sculpt in VR, or sit at the bottom of the ocean looking at pilot fish are experiences not available using standard or 3D monitors.
It's absolutely the right time to get into it, before it becomes ever more corporate, there's plenty of interesting sights out there.
That's not to say that even under Windows when it's working, the Rift isn't a bit of a pain. Its setup is inflexible (and doesn't work by default under Windows 7 - there are ways to fix this, but do use 8 or later), when it says the sensors can be a maximum of 2m apart they really do mean it, it needs plenty of space to work effectively, and sufficient USB bandwidth.
Trying to extend the Rift from my study ( small, only meets minimum 3ft x 3ft Rift area) to my bedroom (lots more space) has been 'fun', currently using two 5M active USB3 extender cables, and a 20M active HDMI cable plugged into a Vive link box. I still get irritating USB disconnect noises, so next step is different USB3 / USB2 cables and a USB monitor.
In the minimum 3ft space, application compatibility is very limited (Google Maps will work, and is brilliant), for a larger space I'm currently failing a lot in 'We Expect You To Die' - which isn't perfect, but the fact there is a world with convincing enough physics and visuals that react smoothly to your movements is impressive.
"...I have a Rift, and it quickly became clear that Windows 10 was the only platform that made sense most of the time..."
No it doesn't. I use my rift on a dual boot system (Win10 & Win7) and haven't found any reason to stick with Win10. I even use Core 2.0 (beta) with the new homes-system on Windows 7.
And yes I have that "experimental" 360 degree 2 camera setup in my living room. No problems at all on both Windows versions.
"Its setup is inflexible (and doesn't work by default under Windows 7 - there are ways to fix this, but do use 8 or later)"
Care to elaborate? I have a 2 camera 360 degrees tracking setup running on both Windows versions without any problems at all (yet). Used more efforts to find out what materials and attributes I could use to mount the sensors high enough without drilling holes in the wall or spending ridiculous amounts of money (at least found some good use of that big cardboard box that the Rift came in).
I fail to see why people find this Rift setup so difficult?
Have people become more stupid over the years?
Common sense... is that an alien concept these days?
My play area luckily is the standard green rectangle (the so-called optimum range).
The only thing I had to adjust was the hanging lamp at the ceiling.... and yes... I broke it ;-)
The Rift will work on 7 and 8, but a number of apps are 10 only, and I'd imagine this will only worsen.
For setup on 7 it fails without warning if the .NET framework isn't installed, and then needs a very specific set of patches installed in a particular way, with a poorly documented install switch (the patches are installed, damnit!) to be used otherwise.
The setup has to be configured in a particular order, the sensor spacing has definite limits, and it's possible to get all the way to just prior to the Guardian stage before the setup claiming the touch controllers aren't correctly registered.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019