Sunday, September 6th 2020

The VirtualLink USB-C VR Headset Connection Standard is Dead

The VirtualLink Consortium which included the likes of NVIDIA, AMD, HTC Vive, Oculus VR, Valve, and Microsoft introduced the USB-C VirtualLink standard in 2018 and was debuted by NVIDIA on the RTX 20 series founders cards. The goal was to simplify VR headset connections by combining power, video, and data over a single USB-C cable. A few niche VR headsets such as the StarVR and XTAL integrated the VirtualLink connector but the standard struggled to receive major adoption.

Valve had planned to introduce a VirtualLink connector for the Valve Index but was canceled due to technical issues. The only major headset to utilize the port is the Oculus Quest however it only uses the USB-C connector and not the VirtualLink standard. NVIDIA excluded the port from their RTX 20 series Super cards and AMD never released a card with the connector. The official VirtualLink website currently redirects to the Wikipedia page for the standard and with NVIDIA excluding the standard from all of their RTX 30 series cards it's safe to say the standard is officially dead.
Source: Road to VR
Add your own comment

15 Comments on The VirtualLink USB-C VR Headset Connection Standard is Dead

#1
Fouquin
Well the future is obviously in tether free headsets so it makes sense.
Posted on Reply
#2
Yttersta
You can't expect a standard to be used, or adopted to begin with - within 3 years and a single generation of products.

20 series cards were the only ones to support this. With a stagnant VR market.

I also agree with the notion that the next generation headsets better be wireless, but this usb-c single cable solution was the next best. Too bad it's gone.

By the way, you should add a "I didn't have it" option to that poll. With the entire amount of not applicables answering no by default would significantly effect the results.
Posted on Reply
#3
bubbleawsome
Honestly I was hoping this next gen would have it. I’m finally planning a new PC and virtual link would make any new VR more appealing to me. Oh well
Posted on Reply
#4
Mussels
Moderprator
The only issues with VR i've had, have all been USB 3.0 power related.

Be better if they gave us external power brick options, since this standard died
Posted on Reply
#6
TheLostSwede
RoutedScripter
Oh look, the all-in-one obsessed crowd just got hit by reality!



Enjoy brain cancer.

www.activistpost.com/2020/09/romanian-academy-says-responsible-scientific-analysis-is-necessary-to-evaluate-5g-health-risks-before-deployment.html
Oh look, a person that thinks 5G will kill him, but haven't bothered to research how much more powerful TV and radio transmitters are... :wtf:
Yttersta
You can't expect a standard to be used, or adopted to begin with - within 3 years and a single generation of products.

20 series cards were the only ones to support this. With a stagnant VR market.

I also agree with the notion that the next generation headsets better be wireless, but this usb-c single cable solution was the next best. Too bad it's gone.

By the way, you should add a "I didn't have it" option to that poll. With the entire amount of not applicables answering no by default would significantly effect the results.
Unfortunately it was a total load of crock, as it required a custom cable that could only be orientated one way when plugged in to the USB-C port, or it wouldn't work.

USB 4 would be able to do this without a special cable and maybe we'll see a single cable solution when it arrives.
Posted on Reply
#7
Mussels
Moderprator
Actually thats probably all they did, give up and wait for USB4 since it has all the relevant tech already standardised
Posted on Reply
#8
watzupken
I wasn't expecting VR to actually take off in the first place. There are some folks that will still like the technology, but I don't believe there's much traction since VR headsets got introduced.
Posted on Reply
#9
saikamaldoss
It’s time for 5G or WiFi 6 connectivity and full wireless. Who wants cables. I love my HP reverb headset.. tho it has the worst controllers. But the cable is so heavy that I get neck pain standing for long with the cables on. And some times it winds on to my neck :/

please don’t provide usb or what ever wired solution it is..

5G will be the best with a dongle or a pcie for the PC
Posted on Reply
#10
RoutedScripter
TheLostSwede
but haven't bothered to research how much more powerful TV and radio transmitters are... :wtf:
This just proves how little detail you know about signals and electro-magnetic radiation sources in general.

Analog TV tranissions ended a long time ago here and replaced with DVB-T, both are tens of miles away and on a totally different frequency.
Signal strength, depending on frequency falls down very quickly with distance. Pulse-rate and the overall structure of the signal matters as well, not just frequency and power.
Wifi is using 2.4 GHz which is a known weapons frequency, 2,4 is close where it interacts with water molecules, since human is 70% water, that's a bad idea.
Microwave oven works on 2.4 GHz as well. The higher you go, 5G targeting 30-60-90 GHz, that's getting in the area of military radar frequencies, probably more dangerous because they don't penetrate well, they'll have to boost power to force the beams to spread out, but even that doesn't work so the need to install thousands of antennas everywhere.
Infact, a chronic exposure to low power levels of radiation is more damaging than a short exposure of high power levels.
Wi-Fi is low-power, but exposure is chronic, day, night, 24/7, router in bedroom, + all the neighbours, phones in pocket directly in area of reproductive organs, no surpirse why there's so many miscarriages.
Skyscrapers, large apartment homes ... with probably 50x Wi-Fi devices in roughly 20 square meters are giant microwave ovens, thank god I don't live anywhere close.
saikamaldoss
It’s time for 5G or WiFi 6 connectivity and full wireless.
Are you going to break into my house and force me?

Come and take my cables then. If you dare. We're not going to suffer the side effects because of lazy people's conveniences.
saikamaldoss
But the cable is so heavy that I get neck pain standing for long with the cables on. And some times it winds on to my neck :/
Lift and suspend the cable from the ceiling, it's that easy.
Posted on Reply
#11
saikamaldoss
RoutedScripter
Come and take my cables then. If you dare. We're not going to suffer the side effects because of lazy people's conveniences.

Lift and suspend the cable from the ceiling, it's that easy.
you are looking at a display screen screen half inch from your eye.. you don’t care for your eye.. but you are worried about 5G lol dude...

About the idea for wiring.. I hate wires. We need better tech.
Posted on Reply
#12
Nephilim666
RoutedScripter
Are you going to break into my house and force me?

Come and take my cables then. If you dare. We're not going to suffer the side effects because of lazy people's conveniences.
Posted on Reply
#13
Mussels
Moderprator
RoutedScripter
This just proves how little detail you know about signals and electro-magnetic radiation sources in general.

Analog TV tranissions ended a long time ago here and replaced with DVB-T, both are tens of miles away and on a totally different frequency.
Signal strength, depending on frequency falls down very quickly with distance. Pulse-rate and the overall structure of the signal matters as well, not just frequency and power.
Wifi is using 2.4 GHz which is a known weapons frequency, 2,4 is close where it interacts with water molecules, since human is 70% water, that's a bad idea.
Microwave oven works on 2.4 GHz as well. The higher you go, 5G targeting 30-60-90 GHz, that's getting in the area of military radar frequencies, probably more dangerous because they don't penetrate well, they'll have to boost power to force the beams to spread out, but even that doesn't work so the need to install thousands of antennas everywhere.
Infact, a chronic exposure to low power levels of radiation is more damaging than a short exposure of high power levels.
Wi-Fi is low-power, but exposure is chronic, day, night, 24/7, router in bedroom, + all the neighbours, phones in pocket directly in area of reproductive organs, no surpirse why there's so many miscarriages.
Skyscrapers, large apartment homes ... with probably 50x Wi-Fi devices in roughly 20 square meters are giant microwave ovens, thank god I don't live anywhere close.




Are you going to break into my house and force me?

Come and take my cables then. If you dare. We're not going to suffer the side effects because of lazy people's conveniences.



Lift and suspend the cable from the ceiling, it's that easy.
Funny how my microwave uses 1200W, and yet my high power, extended range USB wifi adaptor uses 2.5W (and a lot of that isnt for transmission purposes, but the electronics themselves)I
It's just like with antivax people... the dose makes the poison. Anything can kill you in excess, even water and oxygen.

Go re-read your own post where you start with facts, and then suddenly devolve into guesswork and theories instead of those facts... sounds like you're just afraid of something you don't understand, so spend more time and fully understand it and move on with your life.
Posted on Reply
#14
R-T-B
Uskompuf
NVIDIA excluded the port from their RTX 20 series Super cards and AMD never released a card with the connector.
Weird, the EVGA super I bought has one. Is this odd?
RoutedScripter
Come and take my cables then. If you dare. We're not going to suffer the side effects because of lazy people's conveniences.
No, you aren't, because there are no side effects even if the beams enter your home. So calm the frick down.
RoutedScripter
This just proves how little detail you know about signals and electro-magnetic radiation sources in general.

Analog TV tranissions ended a long time ago here and replaced with DVB-T, both are tens of miles away and on a totally different frequency.
Signal strength, depending on frequency falls down very quickly with distance. Pulse-rate and the overall structure of the signal matters as well, not just frequency and power.
Wifi is using 2.4 GHz which is a known weapons frequency, 2,4 is close where it interacts with water molecules, since human is 70% water, that's a bad idea.
Microwave oven works on 2.4 GHz as well. The higher you go, 5G targeting 30-60-90 GHz, that's getting in the area of military radar frequencies, probably more dangerous because they don't penetrate well, they'll have to boost power to force the beams to spread out, but even that doesn't work so the need to install thousands of antennas everywhere.
Infact, a chronic exposure to low power levels of radiation is more damaging than a short exposure of high power levels.
Wi-Fi is low-power, but exposure is chronic, day, night, 24/7, router in bedroom, + all the neighbours, phones in pocket directly in area of reproductive organs, no surpirse why there's so many miscarriages.
Skyscrapers, large apartment homes ... with probably 50x Wi-Fi devices in roughly 20 square meters are giant microwave ovens, thank god I don't live anywhere close.
Oh look, it uses facebook.

The whole "short term to low power levels part" is a serious citation needed moment, and I know you won't find one. We know more than you think.
Posted on Reply
#15
TheLostSwede
RoutedScripter
This just proves how little detail you know about signals and electro-magnetic radiation sources in general.

Analog TV tranissions ended a long time ago here and replaced with DVB-T, both are tens of miles away and on a totally different frequency.
Signal strength, depending on frequency falls down very quickly with distance. Pulse-rate and the overall structure of the signal matters as well, not just frequency and power.
Wifi is using 2.4 GHz which is a known weapons frequency, 2,4 is close where it interacts with water molecules, since human is 70% water, that's a bad idea.
Microwave oven works on 2.4 GHz as well. The higher you go, 5G targeting 30-60-90 GHz, that's getting in the area of military radar frequencies, probably more dangerous because they don't penetrate well, they'll have to boost power to force the beams to spread out, but even that doesn't work so the need to install thousands of antennas everywhere.
Infact, a chronic exposure to low power levels of radiation is more damaging than a short exposure of high power levels.
Wi-Fi is low-power, but exposure is chronic, day, night, 24/7, router in bedroom, + all the neighbours, phones in pocket directly in area of reproductive organs, no surpirse why there's so many miscarriages.
Skyscrapers, large apartment homes ... with probably 50x Wi-Fi devices in roughly 20 square meters are giant microwave ovens, thank god I don't live anywhere close.
Oh? Does it now?

I guess you haven't looked too carefully where TV transmitters are placed.
Let's start with an easy example of them not being "miles away".
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_Palace_transmitting_station
The Crystal Palace transmitter is in fairly central part of SE London and people live very close to it.
So if your theory towards the end of your argument supposedly is true, then the people living right next to this broadcast transmitter should all be dead by now.

Then you seem to be sold on the same lie as most of the anti 5G people, that somehow a router that is limited to 1W out effect at the most (on 2.4GHz, 4W on 5GHz in the US) is somehow going to be able to damage a human being. I presume you never go outside and have blackout blinds in your home, as you would die if a ray of sunlight touched your body? The heat from regular old sunlight produces roughly 1,000W/m2, but I guess it's not something you're concerned about?

As pointed out, a frequency itself has no affect as such, although you are correct that microwaves can be harmful to living beings, if the effect is high enough. At 1W, it can't even penetrate your skin. It would also not cause any kind of heat buildup, as the Wi-Fi "radiation" from your router isn't focused in any way, unlike you know. in a microwave oven that has been designed to focus the microwave by bouncing them around inside it to heat the liquid in your food.

Also, the higher the frequency, the hard it is for the radio wave to penetrate things, so your assumption that a broadcast TV signal would somehow "disperse" and be of no danger to anyone is also complete hogwash, as it's on a frequency band that can more easily penetrate buildings, forests etc. than 2.4GHz Wi-Fi or most 5G bands (some of the sub-6GHz 5G frequencies are using old UHF/VHF bands, but at much lower transmit power).

Guess why there are so many 5G mmWave transmitters? Because the penetration power at those frequencies is next to zero. They can barely penetrate a typical window in a building, even less so a brick wall. This is also why there are a lot of indoors pico and micro cells, as otherwise the mmWave signal wouldn't work inside shopping malls etc. The mmWave transmitters are also restricted in terms of the transmit power, with a pico cell being around 40W of roughly the same energy as the incandescent light bulbs most of us used to have in our homes. www.siversima.com/news/mmwave-for-5g-fixed-wireless-access-a-review
Yes, larger transmitters will have an output somewhere around 300-1,000W, but they still have very limited range compared to something like a broadcast TV or radio transmitted and the out effect is still just a fraction of the latter. A modern DVB-T transmit tower is around 230MW, i.e. 230,000,000W, yet for some reason, 5G is what's going to kill us... :wtf:

Oh and since when are broadcast TV transmitters turned off at night? They're afaik, 24/7, whereas you have a choice to turn off your router, your phone and what not else, when you're not using it.

So please, take your conspiracy theories to some other forum where you can pretend to know what you're talking about. I would rather that you stopped spreading FUD altogether, but that might be too hard.

Oh, I should also point out that I spent a couple of years working for a router manufacturer, but yeah, I know nothing about how any of this works...
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment