blaze466
blaze466 I don't understand this thread.
This doesn't affect me either as I use PC VR. However, I can still easily see why this decision has an awful impact on the experiences of the many people who do use DLNA. It's really quite simple. Deo VR is currently the only solution for those who use scripts with a standalone quest 2. That singular option has now been limited to streaming only - either that, or directly transfer content to the quest 2, which is incredibly cumbersome. Streaming only is not workable for a great many people. Even taking scripts out of the equation, many people signed up on the idea that they could just use the Deo VR/SLR app, as it is marketed thoroughly as an easy all in one solution. It's very weird to be wrenched from that all in one solution offered and suddenly being told to go find some other player, no suggestions, no nothing - just telling those who soon won't be able to make use of the subscriptions they're paying for to figure it out. That is not taking care of the customer at all. And it seems, from what I've read, that there wouldn't have been any warning at all if not for an accidental throwaway reddit comment by staff! That's horrendous. And no, just communicating this change better wouldn't have made everything fine.
Regarding "the html solution", what is it? All I've seen mentioned are one liners about setting up a html webhost. How? Are people just meant to google and bang their heads against a wall for days until they possibly figure it out (or don't), because a service they subscribed to suddenly dropped a critical feature? Know-how of html webhosts and how to set them up shouldn't be assumed knowledge. If this was required knowledge for everyone getting into VR, VR would never have gotten off the ground. Deo VR and SLR are geared towards making things accessible and easier for the user. The Deo VR/SLR app is constantly advertised as the all in one solution, which is great for all those out there without a high level of technical knowledge. Now all those people who relied on DLNA and came to SLR for an easy to use experience are being told to just go set up a html webhost. That is a very poor customer experience for those people - ESPECIALLY those who bought the lifetime subscription. Things like this make people very wary about going lifetime. Now there is more to worry about than videos being taken down for compliance issues, or due to disagreements with studios, server issues, etc. Now people need to consider the possibility of SLR/Deo VR making decisions that completely cripple their ability to use the service they're paying for, unless they learn to set up a pretty technical solution.
It is true that every company has to balance resources and make business decisions based off of them, but that is a blanket statement that any business can use for almost any decision, ill considered or not. It is not sufficient explanation for the removal of a feature so critical to many.
While SLR have made their thoughts clear, it seems the driving force behind this is Deo VR itself. It seems the main reason was DLNA being too difficult to maintain, which happened to fit in with how SLR saw the app/service. It wasn't something deliberately cut out in an attempt to allow innovation to flourish.
Innovation and feature maintenance are not mutually exclusive - both can exist in the same space. While resources are always limited, it seems clear from the outcry that DLNA was not the feature to drop. I'm pretty sure if anything, people wanted local streaming improved? There have been mass requests for Deo VR to incorporate SMB for years! If there were mass calls to improve local streaming for years, why would it be considered acceptable to the userbase to drop the feature entirely? It seems to me that those limited business resources could have been better distributed. I read something from the Deo VR dev regarding them feeling unable to tell staff to work on something other than the UI? That certainly seemed odd. And the whole thing is odd when we do look at the alternatives who can implement local streaming so well, with much less resources at their disposal. Why can they do it so much better?
I note the request for people to not try to speak for the entire customer base, that's fair. However, look at the responses on this forum. There is mass outcry and from the links posted here there is a similar sentiment on reddit. Yours is the only non staff comment I've seen that defends the decision, and it's quite telling that the only positive comment I could find online was from someone who this doesn't affect. All opinions should be heard, but speaking as someone else who killing DLNA doesn't affect, I think it's fair to say that the general consensus is clear.
