Sure, the prices are net.
Hopefully they charge the taxes etc on order, rather than waiting for customs to reach out to us. Iâd much rather know exactly what I am paying, also means it ships faster etc. Nothing worse than incompetent customs holding your package for weeks.
I had my 8kx be held hostage until I paid fees even though I was told beforehand I wouldnât have too. I assume it will be the same here.
Can pimax shoot itself in the foot anymore!? I guess we will need wait for mrtvâs hands on with the crystal and the new lenses. Pretty frustrating, but good to wait.
@Atmos Two interesting things. 1. The tone of the article suggests that the writer went into the Pimax booth with an opinion already formed. My reading of the piece suggests he has an existing dislike for Pimax, and was unlikely to give the product a fair shake.
2. He discusses only the incomplete VR components. According to other visitors the portal- even as a prototype- shows enormous promise for its main purpose as a handheld gaming tablet.
Itâs also interesting that you chose to post no links to more positive reactions. I found more positive responses than negative when in my casual research.
As a backer of the Portal, I donât recall any information on the kickstarter page that suggested it would be shipping in January, but I know that date has been mentioned somewhere by Pimax. It would surprise me if itâs ready this month.
I doubt that the Portalâs sales demographic is the hardcore VR gamer. This device is clearly aimed at the handheld market, where I think it will compete very well.
Weâll have to see how the VR oart of it works out.
Iâm looking at it as a cool game tablet that will provide me a VR source to tide me over between the time I ship my 8KX to Pimax, and the arrival of my 12K.
Has there been any coverage of the Crystal by one of the VR journalists? So far I havenât spotted anything, just youtubers.
Btw, the disclaimer in that UploadVR article on the Portal is telling in terms of what still separates Pimax from a regular commercial company meeting professional standards. @Finn: these journalists have some experience with Pimax and I fear what you call bias is the product of their experience with Pimax. They are not looking at them as a kind of first time Kickstarter start-up but as a mature company having had sufficient time to up their standards. Like many of the other small companies also managed once they had established themselves a bit.
2 Likes
âestimatedâ
??? Fin asked about anything âsuggestingâ delivery in January. I gave a shot of Pimaxes estimated delivery in January.
Whereâs the problem? Is an estimate not a suggestion?
3 Likes
Theyâre a vr website. So yeah. Pimax is really doing the damage themselves. They just love shooting their own feet. And theyâve become very good at that.
And with the portal kickstarter ending where will all the development time be dedicated to now there is still so much to do to complete the portal? I bet not to the 12k⌠No, to a frikking handheld that nobody wants.
1 Like
@Atmos
Quite right- I missed that on the page. Thatâs my error. I did see that date thoâ, as I mentioned, elsewhere as an official target.
I guess what bugs me is that the reporter listed this estimated date as an absolute commitment by Pimax and thus as another example of their duplicitous failures. Thatâs what I mean by noting his apparent extant bias. The other thing he doesnât mention is that Pimax DOES seem to eventually deliver headsets. Unlike say, Arpara or Deca. When you hew to the cutting edge, unexpected technical issues are always waiting to stall you, and firmly promised dates are, as everyone agrees, a really bad idea.
But the writer implies that Pimax acts fraudulently and does so with intent.
1 Like
He says âPimaxâ history is marked by long shipping delays, inconsistent quality, software issues, and customer service concerns such that UploadVR recommends extreme caution before pledging money to the companyâ
Thatâs pretty much true. Again, Pimax really owes it to themselves.
And the portal was a horrible idea from the beginning. Itâs a money and resource drain and now with the really poorly backed kickstarter itâs even getting worse. A full booth of Portals at CES did nothing for the kickstarter, there are now even less people backing this thing than before CES.
It just saddens me that his company continues making dumb decision after dumb decision. Thereâs so much potential!
I believe the Portal has a ton of potential, but I donât think many outside the âVR Enthusiastâ communities know about it, which is who I see the Portal appealing to.
Iâve been out of the VR world since 2013 and Portal is my ideal first step back into gaming.
2 Likes
UploadVR is literally an oculus shill website and has been so for years. David Heaney, one of the head writers there, has a long history of being anti pimax. He has spent years on reddit downplaying literally everything that isnt oculus even getting banned from multiple vr subreddits for being an, and I am quoting literally Palmer Lucky here, an âinsufferable fanboyâ. I dont know why anyone would take them serious.
Pimax has plenty of problems but uploadvr is not an unbiased source. Iâm pretty sure Heaney is even banned hereâŚ
Still waiting for actual legitimate coverage from ces. From an outsiders perspective it looks like Pimax was completely ignored at this event from the media. Even on reddit in some of the bigger vr subs people are talking about every headset that was there besides Pimax like they didnt even know they exist. Everyone is begging for a high end pcvr headset and have no idea one is literally right here.
4 Likes
There are two major aspects here:
- Pimax is obviously banking on the fact that theyâre going to make money with the software, just like Steam, as they must be selling this thing around cost price. Thatâs just going to be impossible, Pimax is WAY to small for that. It wonât happen.
- Theyâre completely unpositioned now, both in marketing as in strategic terms, serving both the very high end and the very low end of the market. This complicates things for a company a lot. If you want to position as a low end provider, youâre focusing on low costs. Thatâs just completely the opposite of what a high-end company focuses on. How are theyâre supposed to run their service department for example. High end = great service. Low end = no money for great service. But thatâs just one example. Business strategy should translate to operational decisions and you just canât make good operational decisions if thereâs no strategy.
1 Like
They might or might not be unbiased. Fact is that they do deserve all of the criticism that theyâre getting in that article. They owe that to themselves.
1 Like
The best explanation for the Portalâs existence I have seen so far is Qualcom requiring its customers to contract large batches of their XR1 chip if they want to get their hands on them in the first place, which is kind of instrumental to both the 12Kâs and Crystalâs announced feature set.
Itâs a device I donât really understand and would never consider getting but I guess Iâm obviously not a member of the intended target group.
Other than that, Iâm pretty underwhelmed regardring CES23 even by Pimax standards (that is, my expectation towards them is already pretty low).
The 12K is a no-show, the Crystal has admittedly improved the controller side majorly, but still no wireless mode shown and no confirmation of ET and therefore DFR, lighthouse plate at the prototype stage, walk-back on the Crystal cable and now a requirement for a seperate power plug etc.
Beyond all that, I donât understand how a company shells out the staggering amount of cash for a booth that size at CES and then uses the wrong lenses. This is something I would take super personal as a CEO as it shows a staggering level of lack of professionalism and causes severe damage to an imminent (?) launch that could so easily have been avoided. Whoever was in charge of the operations at CES needs to be fired and fast.
2 Likes
What they should have done:
Focus on the high-end exclusively. Only make the crystal and the 12k. Make them as perfect as possible. Charge high price (like theyâre doing now, maybe even slightly higher), with that money attract great service personal and give great service.
So theyâre selling only high end, great products and give great service. I believe they can transform into such company. But not if they make low-end gear like âportalsâ (let alone not even making money on the hardware)
1 Like
I also fear the disclaimer Ian Hamilton placed is pretty accurate (although I recall that he is actually biased against Pimax from a tweet around CES2022, but what he writes unfortunately is simply true, I would caution any friend or colleague considering to order something from Pimax more or less the same way).
And this is where we could have it wrong: Pimax Reality series is now placed in pricing regions where consumers, if they spend that kind of amount at all, are used to receive exquisite quality products, think of L series Canon SLR camera equipment etc⌠How long will Pimax survive in this thin air, especially considering their products probably will never even come anywhere near such quality? As long as they offer what nobody else is offering. Resolution, OLED quality blacks, colors, etc. may all be ordinary within 2-3 years. The 12K may hold on to an unusual FoV. But what happens then, when the further advances become ever more complex, and big players start roaming the scene as AR emerges and likely will merge with VR in future devices at some stage not so far away? Pimax must be living in the fear of being one surprise announcement away from being put out of business. If Apple announces their legendary AR headset, itâs price will not even be a shocker to Pimax customers because Pimax announced to be is asking them for 2,5K for the 12K, but then you have Apple quality vs. Pimax quality.
So, being in a low volume, high price market with their newest range of products may end up short-lived and possibly a rough love until then.
Enter the screen the Portal: us more wealthy users in Western countries have a Steamdeck, Quest 2 and PC VR device, and wonder, why on Earth anybody would be interested in the Portal, but for e.g. the Chinese market it may make sense, who knows, and be more sustainable than the high end VR headset market. And a pro is, they may just get away with their mediocre build & QA standards.
2 Likes
Haha yeah thatâs possible too, just focus on low end. But either way, make a decision and go 100% for it. What theyâre doing now is not going to work from a business perspective.