Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Magic Leap One

magicleap.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 653 posts

Re: Magic Leap One

#181

Post by ctdonath »

nradov wrote: post #144
buro9 wrote: post #60

I'm pretty optimistic about Magic Leap, and lightfield technology in general. Where I see it really shining is as a successor to staged plays, and cinema. The thought of allowing viewers to really deeply immerse, comfortably for long periods of time, to control the point of focus, to move around. Kurosawa would shoot movies by building whole sets with all walls intact that worked from every angle, and having the acto…

That would require an order of magnitude more money and effort for movie production. For example, sets would have to look real from multiple angles instead of being just slapped together to work for a single shot. And there's no evidence that audiences actually want this level of interactivity in their "lean back" entertainment.

This resolves major complaints about 3D movies: forced focus, forced POV, and required normal eye-pair function. It's not so much "interactivity" as resolving chronic subtle annoyances: allow natural eye focus around the scene, get subtle shifts in perspective from moving one's head, and realize that not everyone's eyeballs are functioning & coordinated as a "double 2D" view requires.

Re: Magic Leap One

#182

Post by TeMPOraL »

sarreph wrote: post #120
marricks wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't really explain why they're not showcasing it yet.

Helps to stunt some of the vaporware conspiracy theories though :)

You mean "confirm". This website does not do anything to make the product seem not vapourware, and within the context of their entire activity, it can be taken as an evidence for the product being vapourware - after all, if it actually existed, they could've shown someone something.

Re: Magic Leap One

#183

Post by onychomys »

claudiulodro wrote: post #108
eganist wrote: post #4

Good lord they really needed a decent industrial design team on hand, though I guess no one's wearing this out in public, so good looks probably aren't as necessary. I'm just afraid of the image of people using this causing it to go the way of the Segway -- we all remember how Dean Kamen and team envisioned it revolutionizing intraurban transport, yeah? Anyway, I'm glad to see something came of Magic Leap.

I like it. It's got kind-of a Snapchat Spectacles vibe.

And look at how well those did!

Re: Magic Leap One

#184

Post by oliviergg »

salmonfamine wrote: post #158
oliviergg wrote: post #145

Did you notice that the only visible book is 'Snow Crash' From Stephenson ? Some hidden message ?

I believe that Stephenson is currently employed by Magic Leap, weirdly enough.

Didn't know. But you're right ! cf https://www.nealstephenson.com/magic-leap.html

Re: Magic Leap One

#185

Post by artur_makly »

jbergstroem wrote: post #133
jpalomaki wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Creating good demos for wearable technology is hard. You certainly can make fancy simulations like Microsoft for their Hololens, but the devil is in the details. It's mainly about how it feels and you need to experience the technology to figure it out. I don't see much to be gained from demoing prototypes to general public. If it's main blowing - great, but does not really make a difference if you can't buy it. If it…

Speaking of good demos, I thought this demo-ish from the Starbreeze "AR/VR" was stack pretty cool": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x32FHiJJyhQ Not sure how how wide their product will spread though.. [disclaimer: I own shares in the company]

real paintball is unbeatable -;) nature always wins

Re: Magic Leap One

#186

Post by ZuLuuuuuu »

oelmekki wrote: post #101
slazaro wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there an actual difference between this "Mixed Reality" and AR, or are they just inventing a new term for marketing purposes?

When I heard the word "mixed reality" for the first time two years ago, the idea was that AR was a 2d layer on top of reality (like google glasses) and that MR was actual 3d objects merged in the reality. But then, mobile apps started doing the later and called it AR. Also, Hololens did what we were calling MR and called it AR as well. So at this point, I guess you can use whatever word you prefer.

What Google Glass does is not AR. It is simply a wearable computer, not an AR device.

Re: Magic Leap One

#187

Post by ctdonath »

harpastum wrote: post #125
deckar01 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ever since Lytro made a light field camera I have been waiting for a light field display. It seems odd that it is being developed commercially in a compact AR device rather than a TV sized display.

The current generation of VR headsets serve as pretty solid light field displays. Current VR can’t show differences in focus yet, but having a large field of view and vivid colors makes for a pretty awesome experience.

They're not light field displays. Current VR is fixed 2D monitors with focal-length adjusters (so a 5cm display 3cm from your eye looks like it's a 5m display 3m away). Light field presents photons in a way your eye can dynamically adjust focus & position within.

Re: Magic Leap One

#189

Post by _asummers »

whamlastxmas wrote: post #176
julienfr112 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... and all i got was this lousy internet site. Just kidding, the internet site is really beautiful.

Made firefox on Android crash after spending 20 seconds loading though

Took about 10 seconds for the dude with the goggles on to come into focus on Chrome OSX, and scroll didn't work for a good 1-2 seconds after load.

Re: Magic Leap One

#190

Post by bastawhiz »

mustacheemperor wrote: post #169
lvoudour wrote: post #68

Since the 1st iteration of the design is apparently ready, why can't they just show a small demo? It's supposed to be shipping in 2018. They could easily have hired a team of top notch creators to showcase some of the capabilities of the device live -even if the device is still not 100% ready- instead of this silly Manhattan project secrecy. I hope they deliver as promised, but something smells fishy. It's a pity, be…

I share the concern that there's still nothing too publically accessible, but the device itself isn't completely under wraps. The journalist in the Rolling Stone article[0] viewed a few demos built between the ML team, including one with Sigur Ros that's got a very small clip on youtube[1]. I suspect building a demo of this kind of tech that's remotely as impressive viewed on a website or youtube video is challenging…

The device is supposed to be in the hands of actual paying customers within a year and they don't even have pictures or video of it _doing something_. Sure it might not be perfect, but there's exactly zero evidence that this product isn't just a hollow chassis. If a demo at this point comes off as half baked, isn't that a gigantic red flag that this product isn't able to cash the checks that Magic Leap is writing?

Nintendo announced the Switch about six months before it shipped. Before that they announced titles, showed game demos, and talked about titles in development. Magic Leap has shown us what could be a 3D printed mockup for all we know, and has announced (to my knowledge) exactly one thing for the console (mixed reality comics).

Magic Leap should be marketing the hell out of this. It's a multi-billion dollar product, and yet they have exactly zero actual footage of the actual hardware even working. Their sizzle reels have been nothing but concept art. Something is very wrong with this.

Post reply on HN