游戏邦在:
杂志专栏:
gamerboom.com订阅到鲜果订阅到抓虾google reader订阅到有道订阅到QQ邮箱订阅到帮看

谷歌是否将进入芯片制造领域?

发布时间:2015-11-20 10:36:45 Tags:,,,,

作者:Neil Scheneider

几周前出现了一篇描述谷歌联系了芯片制造商希望能够设计属于自己的芯片并制定设备制造商需要遵守的硬件规格的文章。此外,他们还强调虚拟和增强现实是这些全新芯片将开拓的领域之一。尽管该策略也被当成是战胜苹果统一平台的手段,但其实VR和AR世界拥有比我们看的到的更大风险。

按照实际情况来看,手机虚拟现实领域中存在两种选择。一种选择是基于私人角度,即关于VR供应商与手机制造商之间的私人关系。对此的最佳例子便是Oculus与三星的关系以及最终诞生的Gear VR。除了伴随着深度访问智能手机架构的外部传感器以外,它们还结合了有助于呈现低延时虚拟现实体验的功能。从理论上来看这样的关系在所有智能手机制造商身上都能够实现,前提是他们真正致力于技术研究,如此他们便能够找到自己中意的搭档。而手机公司将能够从中受益,因为他们拥有Google Play Store以外的专有的商店,他们能够创造在谷歌平台所没有的特定收益。但不幸的是每台手机本身也都变成了一个平台,并拥有足够的玩家,所以这里变成了一个非常分裂的世界。拥有大量的多样性对于内容创造者和消费者来说都是噩梦,他们需要根据自己的硬件选择去决定内容选择。

gear VR(from chosun)

gear VR(from chosun)

第二种选择便是VR设备制造商与手机制造商没有任何关系。他们创造了一个VR附加设备(游戏邦注:如ImmersiON-VRelia GO),并且他们创造了自己的SDK或使用Google Cardboard的SDK,并且不带有任何与手机的深度架构具有直接关系的外部传感器优势。为了补偿缺失的硬件连接和更多延迟可能,他们提供了更多内容选择进行配对或推荐。对于消费者和供应商来说,这一模式的最大优势便是它不会针对于特定的手机;任何不错的智能手机都能够连接到VR附加设备上。许多供应商都希望销售能够用于多台智能手机上且基于不同质量和灵活性的VR附加设备。但是这里却缺少了硬件连接。

这也是为何有关谷歌芯片的报道如何重要且具有影响力。我们必须清楚大多数情况下,谷歌所做的一切都是关于广告收益和订阅。当他们更重视广告时,便会有更多人在他们的商店中购买内容,并会有更多人提交内容到他们的平台上,如此谷歌便会更开心。任何可能不利于商店消费者或访客流量的因素对他们来说都是大威胁。如果谷歌真的认真对待虚拟现实,他们将利用自己的影响力去确保Android是VR内容与分销的真正平台,并真正提高硬件质量以确保它们的广告能够作为高级虚拟现实体验的强大后盾。广告主总是想看到更多数值并且他们也总是希望能够与赢家合作。

除了芯片制造商外,谷歌也奠定了VR平台的基础。Google Cardboard,YouTube 360-3D支持和Jump VR摄像机的开发都证实了这点。在我看来,如果谷歌彻底完成了自己的芯片设计或制定了一个智能手机制造商必须遵守的规格,这便是他们完成所有这些工作的最后一步。可能在一夜间每个VR设备的不利因素都将消失,谷歌将拥有自己的社交平台(游戏邦注:尽管别人也能够创造属于自己的平台),而内容制造者也将迎来一个更大的市场。

除了多样化的硬件兼容性外,这一切工作还创造了怎样的结果?内容制造者应该会很高兴,因为他们的用户潜能得到了更大的发展。而对于VR硬件供应商来说这则是一把双刃剑,因为他们将拥有自己所需要的更高性能与兼容性,但同时谷歌也将拿到更多网络商店收益—-除非供应商能够拥有独立用户并销售一些真正独特的内容。他们将更努力地区分不同单位,而VR硬件可能会因为太过强大而未能创造长期的收益,所以这时候就需要软件或内容组件的出现。就像三星的Gear VR售价99美元,这足以称得上是一款软件游戏。而为了与之相较量,小型公司可能会依赖于一些稳定的业务关系去创造一些全新的渠道,并解除世界上一些尚未得到开发的市场,努力比这些巨头们更快速地对新趋势做出反应。

所以三星和Oculus的Gear VR怎么样?除了钱和品牌意识外,他们还拥有最宝贵的资源,即时间,但这也是一种有限的资源。我估计他们只拥有两年的时间去买下一个强大的IP组合并进行出售与对外授权,他们还将购买许多谷歌并未接触到的专有内容,而Facebook可能也将提供只适用于Gear VR的独特功能,因为虽然这是一个极具风险性的市场营销手段,它也不会因此完全疏远那些非Gear VR用户。最后,与其它平台不同的是,Facebook和三星不仅会只支持他们的设备,同时他们也将与谷歌进行合作—-这是他们的竞争对手所做不到的。也许到那时候这个世界便会发生改变,而Facebook也会改变他们的硬件支持去与谷歌的VR客户群展开竞争。让我们期待一些更疯狂的变化吧!

不管怎样,如果关于谷歌的微芯消息是真的,那么在手机VR世界将展开一场Facebook平台与谷歌平台的对抗。但毫无疑问,Cardboard仍然还是VR世界的特洛伊木马。面对越来越激烈的竞争,内容制造者将打一场长期胜战,消费者也是,而对于各种规模的VR硬件供应商来说,现在的他们需要发挥创造性思维去思考自己该如何向前发展并在不断变化的世界中占据一席之位。

本文为游戏邦/gamerboom.com编译,拒绝任何不保留版权的转发,如需转载请联系:游戏邦

Has Google Revealed its VR Trojan Horse?

by Neil Schneider

First, I want to underscore that I’m not privvy to information others don’t have have. I read the news like everyone else, and I’m just sharing where I think things are headed and why.

A few weeks ago, an article circulated about Google reaching out to chip manufacturers with hopes that Google could design its own chips and firm up a hardware specification for device makers to follow. More than this, they highlighted virtual and augmented reality as one of the areas where these new chips would thrive. While the strategy was positioned as a means to better compete with Apple’s consistent platform, the VR and AR world have far bigger stakes at play.

As it stands, there are two options in the mobile virtual reality field. Option one is the proprietary angle where a private relationship is struck between a VR vendor and a mobile phone manufacturer. The best example is Oculus’ relationship to Samsung and the resulting Gear VR. With the addition of external sensors along with deep access to the smartphone architecture, they have a solid mix which makes for low latency virtual reality experiences. Relationships like this are theoretically possible with all smartphone makers if they are committed to the technology and they can find a partner they like. The mobile company benefits because they are able to have a unique store outside the Google Play Store and they can make specialized revenues that Google can’t touch. Unfortunately, each phone becomes a platform in itself, so with enough players it becomes a very divided world indeed! With enough diversity, this would be a nightmare for both content makers and consumers having to pick and choose which content they can get according to hardware choices.

Option two is where the VR device maker has no relationship with the mobile phone manufacturer, they create a “clam shell” VR add-on device (e.g. the ImmersiON-VRelia GO), and they create their own SDK or work with Google Cardboard’s SDK without the hardware advantage of external sensors that directly link to the phone’s deep architecture. To compensate for the missing hardware link and the added latency, they are more selective on the content they choose to pair up or recommend. The big advantage with this model for consumer and vendor alike is it’s not phone specific; any decent smartphone can be connected to a VR add-on. Between the multiple vendors expected to sell clam-shell VR add-ons of varying quality and the flexibility to work with multiple smartphones, this actually has potential to offer the sheer numbers in comparison to the phone-specific platforms. Still, there is that missing hardware link.

This is why the Google chip story is so important and so influential. Remember that for the most part, everything Google does is all about ad revenue and subscriptions. The more eyeballs they have seeing ads, the more people buying content from their stores, the more people submitting content to their channels – the happier Google is. Anything that threatens to siphon store customers or visitor traffic is a threat to them. If Google is serious about virtual reality, they will use their influence to make sure Android is the defacto platform for VR content and distribution and they will seriously beef up the hardware quality to make sure their ads are backed by top grade virtual reality experiences. Advertisers want more than numbers; they want to be associated with winners, and Cardboard has to up its game to be taken seriously.

Separate from the chip manufacturing, Google has been laying down the groundwork for a VR platform for some time. Google Cardboard, YouTube 360-3D support, and the development of the Jump VR camera are all working examples of this. In this author’s opinion, if and when Google does follow through with its own chip designs and / or formalizes a must-meet specification for smartphone makers, it will mark the final step in making this all work. Almost overnight, every clam shell VR device will have their handicaps thrown away, Google will have its own social platform (though others can build their own), and content makers will suddenly have a much bigger market to code for.

Beyond diversified hardware compatibility, what are the ramifications of all this? The content makers will be happy for sure because their audience potential will instantly multiply; there is no doubt about this. It will be a double edged sword for the VR hardware vendors in that they will have the improved performance and compatibility they need, but Google is positioned to take most of the spoils from online store revenue unless the vendor(s) can somehow secure an independent audience and sell something unique or specialized. They will definitely have to work harder to differentiate one unit from the next, and the VR hardware on its own may be too cutthroat in the long run to be truly profitable, so there has to be a software or content component that stands out. With Samsung’s Gear VR selling for $99 US, it’s definitely a software game now. To compete, smaller companies will likely rely on solid business relationships to build new channels, reach untapped markets around the world, and strive to react faster than the big guys.

So what of Samsung and Oculus’ Gear VR? Separate from money and brand awareness, they have the most precious resource of all…time; but it’s a finite resource. I estimate they have a two year window to buy up a strong IP portfolio that can be locked down or sold and licensed externally, they are going to have to buy up a lot of exclusive content so Google can’t touch it, and Facebook may have to entertain having custom or unique features that only work on Gear VR because it would be too risky a marketing move to completely alienate non-Gear VR users – they count on having as many eyeballs as possible too. Finally, unlike the other platforms, Facebook and Samsung will probably have the option to not only support their device, but also work equally well with Google’s – this is something their competitors won’t be able to do. Or, maybe the world will be different by then, and Facebook will diversify their hardware support as well to compete with Google’s VR customer base. Crazier things have happened.

For better or worse, if this Google microchip story is true, it’s going to be the Facebook Platform versus the Google Platform in the mobile VR world. Make no mistake; Cardboard is a Trojan horse for the VR world. With rampant competition, content makers instantly win long term, consumers win long term, and now is the time for the VR hardware vendors of all sizes to creatively think about how they can move ahead and grab hold of their slice of the pie in the dramatically different world to come…I think! :-)source:Gamasutra

 


上一篇:

下一篇: