Nothing on that page makes me want to buy one.
Magic Leap One
461–470 of 653 posts
Re: Magic Leap One
#462Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't need a virtual 4K monitor. I can turn my head to see more, just like I do in real life. How close do you have to be to see the pixels in a 4K monitor, and at that point, can you see the entire monitor without looking around? I want the portability, and then the resolution just has to be good enough. If we could get a virtual 1080p display that would be amazing and good enough. But to your point, the VR displa…
you're not doing the math... this is not meant as a slight but: how big is your virtual 1080p screen representing? and at what distance. give me those numbers and I can tell you what display tech it needs to be, but it's going to be on the order of 10-20x density. it's all about pixel radians. Also, 1080 is quite small for reading, macs have retina displays which is nearing print when running anti-aliasing. And don't…
a virtual 1080 display that looks like the real thing would be a big gamechanger. Most companies don't buy 4k displays for their employees because 1080p is generally a lot cheaper and also good enough, even for reading. I still have 2 Dell Ultrasharp 1200p IPS displays at home that are 12 years old but reading/writing text on them is totally fine at the normal viewing distance. I'd want 4K mostly for more real estate.
Re: Magic Leap One
#463What's with the tags in the URL? Is this an ad?
It was likely a blind copy-paste by the submitter, or submitted using the HN bookmarklet. You can contact the mods via the Contact link in the footer and ask them to update the link.
Re: Magic Leap One
#464So this is the primary innovation here:
>Digital Lightfield Our lightfield photonics generate digital light at different depths and blend seamlessly with natural light to produce lifelike digital objects that coexist in the real world. This advanced technology allows our brain to naturally process digital objects the same way we do real-world objects, making it comfortable to use for long periods of time.
Can someone explain in detail how this works and is better / different than a display? Also if this will kill the entire OLED business.
Re: Magic Leap One
#465How'd they manage to get a Porg as a logo?
Re: Magic Leap One
#466Earlier quoted context omitted.
This comes up a lot in VR/AR discussions, but IMO it's the least likely application in the near to medium term. There's just not enough pixels in the headset to accurately simulate multiple high-resolution monitors. For instance, the Hololens is rumored to have 1280x720 resolution per-eye - so a screen that consumes the entire visual field is only 720p, and "simulated displays" that were farther away would be worse.
People keep saying this over and over but I don’t understand. Why does a HMD need the same resolution as a monitor in order to do the same job? Wouldn’t the HMD be equivalent to having like sixteen 1600x1200 displays all around you, and isn’t that at least as good as a single 4K monitor? You could have one virtual display with close to your face for high resolution information, and then dozens of peripheral displays…
A good chunk of it is that text is unreadable in current headsets unless it's far larger than what most people are used to. So that 720p hololens gives you at best a 720p monitor's worth of text at a time[1]. Sure, you can have any number of virtual displays around you at any desirable resolution - they're just unusable until you get close enough that you only see a tiny piece at a time.
To your specific example of "You could have one virtual display with close to your face for high resolution information, and then dozens of peripheral displays further back for ambient information.", yes, absolutely. That makes sense. But the "close to your face" one would show you less than a paragraph of text, if you could actually see the peripheral ones all the time. Useful at times, to be sure, but not equivalent in all (I'd argue "most") situations.
[1]: plus some fudge-factor, because you can read a bit better than with a comparative screen - the change in how the text lands on pixels as you move gives you a slightly higher "effective" resolution... though text at this size is still plenty difficult to read, so you still don't want to rely on it.
Re: Magic Leap One
#467Earlier quoted context omitted.
"This is a game we’re playing around the office right now,' Magic Leap wrote in the description of the video." "In addition to the bulky demo connected to a computer, Mr. Abovitz showed The Information a prototype of the compact device it intends to build. It looked as if somebody fastened electronics to every inch of a pair of wire-framed glasses. It had a multi-layered, flat lens. He would not turn the device on, b…
This is absolutely false, the Rolling Stones journalist tested extensively the miniaturised prototype.
> one year ago, Magic Leap was lying about the technology they had
>> This is absolutely false
The Information documented Magic Leap lying about something unambiguous and untrue. That is absolutely true.
Re: Magic Leap One
#468I 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. Is it ? If we talk abour VR, yes, but there are a number of companies actually delivering AR products whose focus is on productivity. Some examples (but there are more) are Microsoft with Hololens [1] Epson with Moverio devices [2] Sony [3] Vuzix [4] Their oldest model are simple smart glasses, it seems to me that they are mo…
Vuziz is a pretty funny example there, because they used to be (pre-Oculus Rift) focused on VR gaming. The only problem: their product was garbage. I'm astounded the company still exists at all.
Re: Magic Leap One
#469Earlier quoted context omitted.
That was my first reaction as well, but there is one article online by someone who's used the device. It sounds more mature than I assumed it'd be viewing this landing page [0] [0] https://www.rollingstone.com/glixel/features/lightwear-intro...
Where does it say they used the goggles? "My first experience with Magic Leap’s technology in action occurred in a sort of sound stage" Note he uses the generalized word, 'technology', and does not say 'Magic Leap One'. Then later in the visit: "My first close look at the full Magic Leap hardware comes in a secluded space upstairs that resembles a fashion showroom."
"I noticed that when I moved or looked around, her eyes tracked mine. The cameras inside the Lightwear was feeding her data so she could maintain eye contact."
Re: Magic Leap One
#470Earlier quoted context omitted.
"This is a game we’re playing around the office right now,' Magic Leap wrote in the description of the video." "In addition to the bulky demo connected to a computer, Mr. Abovitz showed The Information a prototype of the compact device it intends to build. It looked as if somebody fastened electronics to every inch of a pair of wire-framed glasses. It had a multi-layered, flat lens. He would not turn the device on, b…
This is absolutely false, the Rolling Stones journalist tested extensively the miniaturised prototype.
The article begins with the author describing several demos, only after which he is guided to a different room where he has, in his own words, "My first close look at the full Magic Leap hardware."
Rony Abovitz calls the chips supposedly powering his tech "Sea Monkeys."