Oculus Platform Updates Minimum and Recommended Spec OS to Windows 10

[Hagrid]

Skimmed quite a few articles and nothing about why they dropped 7 and 8. Just that they did. Be nice if they would give a technical reason or MS gave us cash to, something.

I know quite a few people are hanging on to 7, but if MS can't get you to switch, it will make you. It is only going to get worse, so might as well try it.
Some might be surprised with all the tweaks and mods it is close to 7.

 

[heatlesssun]

Skimmed quite a few articles and nothing about why they dropped 7 and 8. Just that they did. Be nice if they would give a technical reason or MS gave us cash to, something.

I know quite a few people are hanging on to 7, but if MS can't get you to switch, it will make you. It is only going to get worse, so might as well try it.
Some might be surprised with all the tweaks and mods it is close to 7.

Windows 10 Recommended: Rift Core 2.0, which underlies Dash, pushes the boundaries of VR computing. Dash's multitasking, window pinning, and Oculus Desktop features are resource-heavy system tasks that we have introduced while still maintaining current performance standards. Oculus Desktop requires Windows 10. You can still use Windows 7 and Windows 8 and enjoy the core functionality of Rift Core 2.0, including the new Dash system menu and Oculus Home. However, you won’t be able to use features like Oculus Desktop for virtual computing, and Dash won't be able to run as an overlay on top of your currently running VR application.

The reason they're giving here is performance for Dash and Desktop at least. Maybe that's just a bunch of nonsense but nevertheless that's what Oculus is saying here. What isn't nonsense regardless is that Oculus would optimize and target NEW Rift features for 95% of users.

 

[Exavior]

Atari 2600? Not even a comparison.

My Atari 2600 runs fine. I don't see why I should be forced to upgrade to newer next gen and higher cost PCs when my 2600 runs just fine. Yet if I want to play Far Cry 5 I can't get a copy on my Atari 2600. This is complete and utter bullshit caused by lazy developers who refuse to support every platform forever and ever. They should make games run on every platform ever made and make them run on all pc specs ever made. This isn't the thoughts of a crazy person, this is the thoughts of a person with a perfectly sound mindset. The voices in my head told me so. shit I wasn't supposed to type that part.

 

[DPI]

If the user base for Steam VR is already 95% Windows 10 then the rational financial decision would be to support those users above the much smaller user base of 7/8.1 especially with 7 having only 18 months of extended support left and Windows 8.1 probably just a fraction of Windows 7 users.

But it's not, so again, keep dreaming. It won't be "95%" for years to come, just like DX12 will be irrelevant for years to come. Extended support ending in 2020 also means fuckall - people will remain on 7 and 8.1 until MS starts respecting core users again and makes some changes to 10 including an opt out for OS level spying.

yet Oculus is saying that there is when it comes to their Dash and Virtual Desktop features for the Rift.

It's one thing to call me a Windows shill but when people start to completely disregard what a developer is saying about technical aspects of their products without ANY in-depth technical knowledge of that product or any specific technical argument to contrary that's not helpful or informative.

Here is what the developer is actually saying if you read beyond the headline:

"Windows 7 and 8.1 users are still supported for the Rift features they know and love today, but they may not be able to use many new and upcoming features and apps". So basically nothing will change and Windows 7/8 will continue getting support. If and when some must-have new Oculus/Dash feature comes along that makes the tradeoff to OS level spying, forced reinstalls every 6 months and all the other downsides and gotchas with 10 worth it, Rift customers can decide then.

They're merely falsely listing Windows 10 as the minimum OS presumably in the belief that more customers convert to 10 and it's less work for them to certify three OS's. But too fucking bad, that's the commitment they made when they began taking money for their product.

 

[Hagrid]

My Atari 2600 runs fine. I don't see why I should be forced to upgrade to newer next gen and higher cost PCs when my 2600 runs just fine. Yet if I want to play Far Cry 5 I can't get a copy on my Atari 2600. This is complete and utter bullshit caused by lazy developers who refuse to support every platform forever and ever. They should make games run on every platform ever made and make them run on all pc specs ever made. This isn't the thoughts of a crazy person, this is the thoughts of a person with a perfectly sound mindset. The voices in my head told me so. shit I wasn't supposed to type that part.

Your analogy sucks and makes no sense. I am not even totally sure what you are on about?
Software wise it won't, hardware wise it won't. Just like that Intel chip that they say would not run on the 100/200 series and you had to buy another 300 series. Well, people got it to run just fine.
Same thing here. If it won't run because there has been a change that won't allow it, I am fine with it and understand. But I am not a little sheep that when they say, nope it won't run, we have no reason for it but it won't have a nice day. I would like an answer is all.

 

[Exavior]

Your analogy sucks and makes no sense. I am not even totally sure what you are on about?
Software wise it won't, hardware wise it won't. Just like that Intel chip that they say would not run on the 100/200 series and you had to buy another 300 series. Well, people got it to run just fine.
Same thing here. If it won't run because there has been a change that won't allow it, I am fine with it and understand. But I am not a little sheep that when they say, nope it won't run, we have no reason for it but it won't have a nice day. I would like an answer is all.

partly I was just being a smart ass.

In reality, every time somebody comes out saying that they are going to make a piece of software no longer work on older OSs everyone gets their panties in a bunch. When XP was dropped people went on and on about that, when Vista got dropped ones of people complained, when 7 got dropped for some stuff saying you had to use 8 they went on and on about it.

Every new OS, be it OS X, Linux or Windows changes some of the core of the system with every major release. You might not see it, but in the background things change. There are new features added to might give better memory management, there might be UI changes that let you do something different. In the case of windows, versions of DirectX change between some versions. As older code gets removed / replaced you even notice things such as getting a little better performance on older hardware making the change. Meaning that maybe on XP a game would just barely run, bump the system up to 7 and with it better using the hardware, maybe instead of a choppy game you get a few extra FPS to give you a somewhat playable game. In the example of your intel chip. You might have got it to work just fine, but does that mean that you didn't lose a single feature or improvement? You can drive a car with a flat tire, won't be a smooth ride and you will fuck up your rim but you can still drive on it. Doesn't mean that you should.

In VR you can't really accept something close to working. Had a game running slower than it should one night and had a little bit of choppiness to it. Didn't think much about it till about 10 minutes later when I got sick to my stomach. So if the ability to do something needs to some extra feature in 10, or performance boost it gets in 10, then it needs that to display correctly otherwise you will have people getting sick.

And again this isn't just about VR, this is something people bitch about every time it is said something will no longer support 2 or 3 OSs back due to people not wanting to have to upgrade. it isn't about being a sheep, it is about realizing OS upgrades bring new features that companies don't want to go back to add to old versions of their OS so in time software has to stop supporting old OSs in order to make use of new features that aren't available in older versions of the OS. And software companies don't want to make multiple versions of software with different features for every possible OS.

 

[HeadRusch]

Good thing I've got a Vive then. Not going anywhere near 10 until Microsoft provides a telemetry opt out switch, and a way to limit forced updates to security patches while ignoring the bloatware nonsense features.

Telemetry? This is 2018 man, that Windows 7 build is getting ancient and isn't not like its some Linux-fortress of secrecy to begin with

Fortunately, 8.1 with StartIsBack still plays 100% of my Steam and VR games, without W10's headaches of force rebooting while I've got work open, or reinstalling the whole OS every six months and resetting everything back to MS defaults.

[/quote]

I'd just upgrade and be done with it. This is a battle you will lose, you're just denying yourself the perks of drinking the Kool Aid right now.....mmmm....delicious. Bonus: your shit will just work.

 

[DPI]

And again this isn't just about VR, this is something people bitch about every time it is said something will no longer support 2 or 3 OSs back due to people not wanting to have to upgrade. it isn't about being a sheep, it is about realizing OS upgrades bring new features that companies don't want to go back to add to old versions of their OS so in time software has to stop supporting old OSs in order to make use of new features that aren't available in older versions of the OS. And software companies don't want to make multiple versions of software with different features for every possible OS.

The false equivalence here is absurd. Complaints about Windows 10 go far, far beyond "just people complaining about a new OS like they always do".

People aren't staying with 7 or 8.1 because they think it's just that amazing or because they're merely resistant to anything new. They're conscientiously avoiding 10 - as a form of protest, or just because it does nothing better than 7 or 8.1 - while simultaneously introducing all sorts of user-hostile gotchas: OS level spying, forced full reinstalls every 5-6 months than can remove programs while reinstalling all the bloatware you thought you removed, resetting settings and default program handlers to MS defaults, etc.

 

[Hagrid]

The false equivalence here is absurd. Complaints about Windows 10 go far, far beyond "just people complaining about a new OS like they always do".

People aren't staying with 7 or 8.1 because they think it's just that amazing or because they're merely "resistant to anything new". They're conscientiously avoiding 10 - as a form of protest, or just because it does nothing better than 7 or 8.1 - while simultaneously introducing all sorts of user-hostile gotchas: OS level spying, forced full reinstalls every 5-6 months than can remove programs while reinstalling all the bloatware you thought you removed, shipping features slowly being removed etc.

You can go through my post and know I absolutely hate 10. Heatlesssun says 95% Rift users are using 10. I think he thinks it means 95% of the Rift users like it so much that they made the switch to 10. Wrong! They switched due to being forced to or not play certain games. I would love to see somebody make a program that tricked win 7/8 into thinking it was 10 and see if those games run just fine.(DX12 of course won't)

Past that, I think people will switch when it gets bad enough that there are games they want to play that will require 10. I know there are people hanging on to 7/8 but in the end you will need to switch for those games. That was the only reason I switched. It makes no difference if Rift was paid to do this or not, the fact is that it is done. Maybe people can have 2 boot drives, one for 10 and one for 7/8?

 

[heatlesssun]

But it's not, so again, keep dreaming. It won't be "95%" for years to come,

Oculus said that their user base was 95% Windows 10, it's in the OP link:

Windows 10 is now the minimum and recommended operating system spec for Rift. With most active Rift owners (95%) running Windows 10, this ensures we’re focused on delivering the latest advancements to the highest number of people possible.

Probably not that much different than the Vive. And BTW, the Vive Pro doesn't officially support Windows 7: https://www.vive.com/us/ready/. Of course everyone was screaming about the price to really notice that.

"Windows 7 and 8.1 users are still supported for the Rift features they know and love today, but they may not be able to use many new and upcoming features and apps".

Just like I said, support for older OSes is degrading over time but the legacy is still there. Again, just like it always works.

So basically nothing will change and Windows 7/8 will continue getting support.

Not necessarily for the latest and greatest though, again the point here.

They're merely falsely listing Windows 10 as the minimum OS presumably in the belief that more customers convert to 10 and it's less work for them to certify three OS's. But too fucking bad, that's the commitment they made when they began taking money for their product.

The Rift user base is ALREADY 95% Windows 10 according to Oculus.

 

[heatlesssun]

You can go through my post and know I absolutely hate 10. Heatlesssun says 95% Rift users are using 10. I think he thinks it means 95% of the Rift users like it so much that they made the switch to 10.

What are you talking about? Oculus said that 95% of Rift users are already on 10, it's in their blog post.

Windows 10 is now the minimum and recommended operating system spec for Rift. With most active Rift owners (95%) running Windows 10, this ensures we’re focused on delivering the latest advancements to the highest number of people possible.

https://www.oculus.com/blog/updating-rifts-minimum-and-recommended-spec-os-to-windows-10/

 

[Hagrid]

What are you talking about? Oculus said that 95% of Rift users are already on 10, it's in their blog post.



https://www.oculus.com/blog/updating-rifts-minimum-and-recommended-spec-os-to-windows-10/

I know. Because there were games in the beginning that were 10 only. I switched a while ago because of it. Not because I wanted to.(well if I wanted to play those games) Big difference.

 

[heatlesssun]

I know. Because there were games in the beginning that were 10 only. I switched a while ago because of it. Not because I wanted to.(well if I wanted to play those games) Big difference.

Fair enough. But let's be real. A nearly decade OS in Windows 7 and one that was a market failure in Windows 8.x were never going to be the way forward for PCVR.

 

[disemboweler]

I meant as an OS. Unless the game is DX12, the game does a check to see what OS, it it's anything but 10, it won't play. If you can trick the game into thinking it was running on 10, I bet the game would play fine.

I guess that would be somewhat correct if the game devs in question just hate money (as would Facebook/Oculus), but I have a feeling you have no idea what you're talking about... in fact it's quite clear. Win7 and 10 are not nearly the "same" to any advanced application. If it costs more to support Win7 than it makes you, you simply don't.

 

[Hagrid]

I guess that would be somewhat correct if the game devs in question just hate money (as would Facebook/Oculus), but I have a feeling you have no idea what you're talking about... in fact it's quite clear. Win7 and 10 are not nearly the "same" to any advanced application. If it costs more to support Win7 than it makes you, you simply don't.

This is exactly the usual answer. You have no answer. I want a link with facts, not just the number 10 is higher than 7, so it must be better.

 

[heatlesssun]

This is exactly the usual answer. You have no answer. I want a link with facts, not just the number 10 is higher than 7, so it must be better.

And your answer is that a nearly 10 year old OS that's only been receiving security patches for over 3 years is functionally the equivalent of an OS that's being actively developed with new features and specifically AR/VR tech as Windows 10 is the OS that runs HoloLens. And that to the 95% Windows 10 user base for the Rift that Oculus stated and there's just nothing mysterious or nefarious about Oculus degrading support for Windows 7/8.1.

This always going to be the case, Windows 7/8.1 were going to age out and it not surprising AT ALL that something as new as VR would begin to see the aging process before typical applications. It's kind of crazy, people here complain about the all of the Windows 10 updates, the 1709 update which was a HUGE VR update specially around Windows Mixed Reality (versions of Windows 10 prior to 1709 don't support WMR any more than Windows 7), but Windows 7 that's been mothballed for years, it's got EXACTLY the same VR support.

 

[tetris42]

As older code gets removed / replaced you even notice things such as getting a little better performance on older hardware making the change. Meaning that maybe on XP a game would just barely run, bump the system up to 7 and with it better using the hardware, maybe instead of a choppy game you get a few extra FPS to give you a somewhat playable game. "game.exe has stopped working."

Please. Under the hood changes can make lots of programs run better, greater legacy game compatibility is not one of them. Legacy games are the FIRST thing to go on a new version of Windows. Mega popular ones usually work or have workarounds. Less common ones, it's a dice toss.

 

[heatlesssun]

Legacy games are the FIRST thing to go on a new version of Windows. Mega popular ones usually work or have workarounds. Less common ones, it's a dice toss.

S lot of "it depends" with this. [H] has been doing its series on older games at 4k with modern hardware. We're not talking about games that need a DOS emulator, stuff like the original Crysis that's 10 years old or so. Hard to really compare back to when I initially ran these games, obviously the point of the [H] article is to see how these games run on modern hardware and they tend to run insanely well on my sig rig at 4k compared to contemporary hardware at initial release. What's interesting is that these games aged well when given new hardware and the ones I've tested personally had zero issues with Windows 10.

 

[Exavior]

Please. Under the hood changes can make lots of programs run better, greater legacy game compatibility is not one of them. Legacy games are the FIRST thing to go on a new version of Windows. Mega popular ones usually work or have workarounds. Less common ones, it's a dice toss.

Where did you get old games from? If your piece of shit computer can hardly play 10 year old games because it is at or below min specs you should probably just stop gaming. I am talking about newer games. If you buy a brand new game and your hardware is at min specs or just below and you are on an older OS. You could get a few FPS boost. Might only be 2-4 FPS, but when you are at low numbers that is something.

 

[tetris42]

Where did you get old games from? If your piece of shit computer can hardly play 10 year old games because it is at or below min specs you should probably just stop gaming. I am talking about newer games. If you buy a brand new game and your hardware is at min specs or just below and you are on an older OS. You could get a few FPS boost. Might only be 2-4 FPS, but when you are at low numbers that is something.

I misunderstood. Usually when talking about gaming on XP, one's talking about games that actually came out for the platform. Those are a complete dice toss as to whether they'll run on a modern OS. You're right, of course games tend to perform well on the OS they're designed for.

 

[Exavior]

I misunderstood. Usually when talking about gaming on XP, one's talking about games that actually came out for the platform. Those are a complete dice toss as to whether they'll run on a modern OS. You're right, of course games tend to perform well on the OS they're designed for.

I was just using XP as an example for that time frame. Thought if I tried to use the example of Windows 7 and 10 that somebody would attack that so decided to roll the clock back a few years and use the example of the release of windows 7 and somebody still doing a little bit of light gaming on XP with a computer they had for many years that was hardly at the specs needed to run XP to start with. The main point I was trying to make was just that before Vista most new OS releases only added more bloat to everything meaning the min specs of the OS kept going up more and more to have it run worse and worse at the min level. However with Vista, no matter how much some people disliked it, with some changes that were made allowed a computer that was barely good enough to run XP actually ran vista ok, better than it did XP. Same when 7 came out, min specs for the OS resulted in better everyday computing than it would have been with the same hardware running xp or vista, and so on. Even if they are slight steps up they are still steps up and not back.

Doing a short search so far found 1 review from a few years back that was showing benchmarks with very slight improvements with games on windows 10 than 7 or 8. Batman Arkham City running at 118 FPS on 7 and 8, 123 on windows 10. few other games only being around 1 FPS better. 3D mark fire strike ultra a very slight higher score on 8 than it did 7 and then a slightly higher score on 10 than 8. I can find other mentions of slight higher frame rates in 10 than 7. Might not be anything huge, but still you still see background changes or simply driver changes giving you better performance from one OS release to the next with things designed for the earlier release. Once things are started to be designed against some new feature of the newer OS with older OSs being supported to be nice, you will notice small bumps in features that don't work on the older or everything working but at the cost of some performance.

Which again for VR you need to make sure that everything is running as perfect as possible otherwise people will get sick far more often. You can always run things below min spec, that doesn't mean that it is in anything close to the expected experience.