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

311–320 of 653 posts

Re: Magic Leap One

#311

Post by grogenaut »

phyller wrote: post #289
shimon wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are two reasons why the field is focused on gaming and not productivity: fidelity and familiarity. It's hard to build high-enough fidelity into the hardware at a reasonable price point. And even if you did make VR goggles that were great for giant spreadsheets at $1000, it would be a weird enough idea that it would have to be massively better than $1000 worth of monitors to get people interested. In gaming, on…

Those are valid points, especially your point about fidelity, current tech is good enough for gaming and apparently not good enough for work (or we haven't figured out how to use it right). So they can sell it for that right now. But this and other comments are vastly underestimating the resources that people would be willing to exchange to make their work better. For what I described, a "reasonable" price point coul…

What is the rate of spending in industry on displays vs computers? My general feel is people skimp on displays and over spend on compute. So it would be hard to fight that trend.

Secondly with VR as a desktop replacement... This is simple math. A 4k (or higher) 30" monitor will always be easier and cheaper to build and worst case the same. Except it's at 3' from your face. Shrink that monitor massively and stick it inches from your face. More expensive. Now do the trig on how many and how small of pixels would be required to pay that same resolution from 3' to 1"... Massive downscale... But great we'll get there on display density.... Except, and this is the kicker... For a lot less you can just upgrade the 4k monitor.

Basically unless something fundamentally changes in display tech or we hit a Max resolution that people care about... Miniture displays will mathmatically lag large displays. Yes smartphones tipped the balance but it all got rolled into desktop displays and tvs.

So you lose on econimics and math.

A display tech with massive resolution but something that inherently keeps it from scaling would be a big kicker. Or as some people have said... Hitting 16k or so resolution on VR screens per eye and your dream is there.

Till then gaming is a massive tech driver... Not people using spreadsheets

Re: Magic Leap One

#312

Post by jdmichal »

AriaMinaei wrote: post #292
phyller wrote: post #226

I don't understand why this entire field seems so focused on gaming, and not productivity. The single most interesting thing to me was the "displays on demand". There are two things that would absolutely revolutionize how I work that I would pay big money for: 1) Any sort of glasses that would allow me to view virtual displays in high definition. I don't care if I have to turn my head to see more than one display, I…

I see this is a popular wish, and I'm afraid it's frustratingly unimaginative. Finally we have a medium that can open up entirely new ways of doing things with computers, yet so many people just wish it could replicate the old ways. Same thing happened when the first display computers were made to emulate paper-based terminals instead of exploring what's possible on a graphical display. We still haven't fully recover…

I wonder if Dynamicland is looking into VR at all? That would be a really interesting mix!

https://dynamicland.org/

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15962730

Re: Magic Leap One

#313

Post by frik »

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…

Wasn't "Magic Leap" a holographic display powered by lasers??

And now it's an AR-glass, one amongh several AR-glasses. So they pivoted and the holographic display is dead?

Re: Magic Leap One

#314

Post by tomc1985 »

buro9 wrote: post #164
659087 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After going out to see a movie for the first time in a few years this past weekend, I can't really picture many of the overweight families I saw fully reclined shoveling hamburgers into their faces wanting to get up and "interact" with a movie.

But could you picture a set in the round with all of the audience sitting in a circle in a tiered auditorium, and a set being rendered over the audience and actors performing in the middle? Shakespeare in the round would be given a fully immersive experience, and it didn't require any person to move at all... it simply means that from the perspective of each individual the set is fully complete and hides the audience…

I like this vision, but without the stupid AR goggles. Screw AR, figure out animated holography!

Re: Magic Leap One

#315

Post by koolba »

shimon wrote: post #262
phyller wrote: post #226

I don't understand why this entire field seems so focused on gaming, and not productivity. The single most interesting thing to me was the "displays on demand". There are two things that would absolutely revolutionize how I work that I would pay big money for: 1) Any sort of glasses that would allow me to view virtual displays in high definition. I don't care if I have to turn my head to see more than one display, I…

There are two reasons why the field is focused on gaming and not productivity: fidelity and familiarity. It's hard to build high-enough fidelity into the hardware at a reasonable price point. And even if you did make VR goggles that were great for giant spreadsheets at $1000, it would be a weird enough idea that it would have to be massively better than $1000 worth of monitors to get people interested. In gaming, on…

> It's hard to build high-enough fidelity into the hardware at a reasonable price point. And even if you did make VR goggles that were great for giant spreadsheets at $1000, it would be a weird enough idea that it would have to be massively better than $1000 worth of monitors to get people interested.

I doubt that. If you make a VR/AR/?R version of a Bloomberg terminal or Factset then finance firms will literally roll up wads of cash and throw them at you. It doesn't have to be massively better. It just can't be worse which is the real hurdle. Granted I'm not an expert on the subject but every VR/AR app I've seen that claims to be the "$APP Killer" simply sucks.

This is the same reason nobody has dethroned Excel in finance. There's plenty of things that solve specific sub problems but the generic, "I have tabs of data and I want to slice and dice it" always goes back to an analyst exporting data to an Excel file.

Re: Magic Leap One

#316

Post by TylerE »

shimon wrote: post #262
phyller wrote: post #226

I don't understand why this entire field seems so focused on gaming, and not productivity. The single most interesting thing to me was the "displays on demand". There are two things that would absolutely revolutionize how I work that I would pay big money for: 1) Any sort of glasses that would allow me to view virtual displays in high definition. I don't care if I have to turn my head to see more than one display, I…

There are two reasons why the field is focused on gaming and not productivity: fidelity and familiarity. It's hard to build high-enough fidelity into the hardware at a reasonable price point. And even if you did make VR goggles that were great for giant spreadsheets at $1000, it would be a weird enough idea that it would have to be massively better than $1000 worth of monitors to get people interested. In gaming, on…

And 3rdly...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touchscreen#"Gorilla_arm"

Re: Magic Leap One

#317

Post by criddell »

cryptoz wrote: post #206
applecrazy wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, if the theory that they’ve faked everything so far is true, then it could be possible for them to fake a demo.

There is absolute hard evidence that they have faked videos that do not represent the reality of their product. They have a video where they show 100 people watching the Magic Leap effects without wearing any googles. With today's announcement that video is a very clear fake without any attempt to make it resemble a final or even in-development product. Their videos are fake and do not show what they are building. Th…

> They have a video where they show 100 people watching the Magic Leap effects without wearing any googles.

Is that the whale in the gymnasium video? If so, then I think the people were virtual as well. It may have been an empty room.

Re: Magic Leap One

#318

Post by [deleted] »

Dirlewanger wrote: post #301
TotempaaltJ wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently it's real: https://www.rollingstone.com/glixel/features/lightwear-intro... Common concerns, like FOV (not very big), are addressed in this article: > The viewing space is about the size of a VHS tape held in front of you with your arms half extended. It’s much larger than the HoloLens, but it’s still there.

New outlets do sponsored shit all the time. I wouldn't put it past them for this to be just free advertising and it be 100% lies.

[deleted]

Re: Magic Leap One

#319

Post by mattbierner »

bluedino wrote: post #45

In all seriousness, porn would be an amazing application for this technology.

The medium brings new opportunities sure, but also its own challenges. For example, capturing convincing 3D representations of live people is really difficult. Even just motion capture in specially designed studios isn’t easy.

Besides 2D overlays, I suspect that most AR applications will use avatars instead of trying to digitize real people. An unrealistic or cartoonish avatar would also avoid any uncanny valleyness and quite likely would even be part of the appeal

Re: Magic Leap One

#320

Post by leoedin »

zer00eyz wrote: post #260
phyller wrote: post #226

I don't understand why this entire field seems so focused on gaming, and not productivity. The single most interesting thing to me was the "displays on demand". There are two things that would absolutely revolutionize how I work that I would pay big money for: 1) Any sort of glasses that would allow me to view virtual displays in high definition. I don't care if I have to turn my head to see more than one display, I…

> I don't understand why this entire field seems so focused on gaming, and not productivity. Lets look at a similar product that lives on as "productivity", one that did NOT launch with gaming features: google glass. For most of us, and most companies they aren't going to invest 100's or 1000's of dollars on something unproven. We might do that for "entertainment" purposes but not productivity ones until the tech is…

Apparently Google Glass is seeing growing use in factories.

https://www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2017/03/18/51...

Post reply on HN