My understanding is this is not true patents are good for 20 years in US,Canada and internationaly by légal accord but a fee must by paid to the office patent to keep the right alive. After 20 years the idea is given on in the open but every patent is specific for example the Samsung patent include a curve display where the oculus is more a sperique display so the patents don’t really intersect themselves.
My take is that, since Samsung sells display panels, that they will license this patent to VR manufacturers who use their panels, but not to those who want to use a different brand panel.
I’m pretty sure the 180 was referring to maximum binocular fov, whereas individual eye peripheral vision was a separate measurement. Maybe I’m wrong? Sounds like a fantastic standalone hmd. Wonder what 3cosystem it plans to support. Hopefully Bigscreen beta.
It’s not a product, or even a prototype has we know of… patent are their to secure market position for possible futur products. The lens for such headset probably even don’t exist don’t hold your breath…
Like @neal_white_iii said Samsung is just securing a market for their flexible panels and clients… beside to be consequential such 180 degres panel will need huge resolution like 8k minimally so driving this sort of beast @90hz will not be possible in the near future ( for a mass market product at a reasonable cost)
I would agree. Hardware patents are often very specific in their implementation (they used to actually require a model to be sent in for the approval process).