He should have stayed silent. Utter shite, and I don't know why you are posting some idiot's opinions here.
This is just plain wrong. Anyone can implement OpenVR as a service like Valve have done with SteamVR. Anyone can contribute to, fork or change OpenVR and use it how they please. Anyone is free to use OpenVR for their headsets. They don't have to ask anyone, they don't need to license it. That is the crux of the matter here - once Oculus were acquired by Facebook, Valve did not want them to have the monopoly in how to implement VR in games, hence why they have contributed significantly to a free and open alternative.
Clearly, they were right to do this.
If Oculus made their own console, and released their headset for it I would be a little less aggrieved by all this. However, they are entering an inherently open PC market. I can use any combination of hardware that I want, I can play Elite Dangerous with my HOTAS, Fanatec wheel or even RailDriver if I want. Oculus are trying to prevent that. They want to make their own closed system within an open ecosystem. Even the biggest Oculus fans are going to find it hard to defend that philosophy.
The equivalent would be locking games down to work with certain monitors, or Sony saying PS5 will only work with Sony TVs. That is literally what is happening here. A VR headset is just a display device, it should not be used to separate users. Ironically, both the Vive and Rift HMDs are basically exactly the same in terms of specs, bar some extremely negligible differences so Oculus's rubbish about how they want to prevent crap knock-off headsets from working with their games is moot. In fact, people should be free to use crap knock-off headsets if they wish.
Also, I'll just note that Steam has a monopoly because they are, despite their problems, the best online store. You look at the features they have and it is no wonder people complain when they have to use another store. Plenty of others have tried, but Steam has remained to the primary marketplace that people use. They have not used any anti-consumer practices to do this (I suppose their customer service might be anti-consumer though!), they have done it by providing the best overall platform and on merit (also, they were first which does count for something but that's part of the innovation of the service).
Now with Windows 10 and Oculus, competitors are trying more anti-consumer tactics to overcome Steam's stranglehold. With Windows 10 I'm a little less annoyed because at least it works with all Windows 10 PCs (which is a free upgrade in itself) and does not lock itself behind an expensive piece of kit.
But the problem isn't about Steam's popularity. People aren't complaining that they can't use Steam, they are complaining that they can't use their headsets with Oculus Home. Oculus should be focused on making a superior store (which will take time, granted), they should make it the home of VR, the first place you want to go to to experience VR on PC. They should support other headsets to drive this growth. Instead, they are focused on creating a walled platform, and the VR industry is suffering because of it. How many updates have there been to Oculus Home since it launched two months ago? I think maybe just one, which allowed people to install it on a separate drive and recently there was a web update so people could access it on the web. There have been no new features, it is still as barebones as it was when it was released.
I guess if I want the PC to remain an open platform, that makes me entitled? Rubbish. I just want what is good about the PC to remain.