101–110 of 137 posts
Optical AR is a dead end. Passthrough AR with VR goggles and 8K cameras on the outside will be the way that wins.
But it be ridiculous to thing that people are going to be going out in public with a VR headset with cameras (known as Passthrough AR). On top of a number of human factor issues, it would dangerously block a person's view of the real world.
For years I haven't been excited by anything in the VR space. I tried them, even with the running apparatus and the slippery shoes, and it was fun. But that's it. Nor the Leap, the Quest or the Hololens interest me very much. It doesn't bring much into my life, but promise to take a lot from it. Besides, the fact it's backed by companies with a not so good track record at respecting their users, and some of them, at…
https://www.thearshow.com/podcast/111a-karl-guttag-part-1 https://www.thearshow.com/podcast/006-karl-guttag-pt2
We designed a number of ar, an vr glasses. Engineers of most buzzwordy brands don't seem to have had "optics 101" during their engineering education. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28839541 > Holographic waveguides, and such are a dead end development with a substandard image quality which you cannot do anything about, as well as its inefficiency (these waveguides waste 70-90%+ of light.) > The fundamental prob…
For years I haven't been excited by anything in the VR space. I tried them, even with the running apparatus and the slippery shoes, and it was fun. But that's it. Nor the Leap, the Quest or the Hololens interest me very much. It doesn't bring much into my life, but promise to take a lot from it. Besides, the fact it's backed by companies with a not so good track record at respecting their users, and some of them, at…
Just added myself for notification when their kickstarter begins (Simula). I wish they went with an AMD APU, instead of Intel Xe graphics. The youtube gameplay comparisons seem to give AMD a big edge in well... everything. I'll definitely be backing this. I want to play Tabletop Simulator on all of my walls and ceilings. :-) (Thanks for telling me!)
Optical AR is a dead end. Passthrough AR with VR goggles and 8K cameras on the outside will be the way that wins.
None of the big companies are interested in what that would be though.
They want the equivalent of the next smartphone revolution so it needs to be like a pair of glasses.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This seems like a tech-community-only opinion to me, the same thinking that is currently killing Magic Leap. If you want to build a mass-market AR headset, you should have one priority: make it look like glasses. People like eye contact. People don’t like looking like alien telemetry pods are eating their eyeballs. Once you have that, then you can worry about things like resolution, fov, and color reproduction. The o…
I don't think there is a market for AR on a consumer's face except like a side display like Google Glass. I think the market for AR is in industrial operations, military, etc. where people won't care what they look like.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would a robot need AR at all? And the challenge with building a repair robot is not to provide it with information about the item, it's in understanding the information and physically manipulating the item.
A robot doesn't need ar. That's my point I tried making. As soon as you actually use ar for people, at that point you have enough data for a robot to just do it instead. As soon as you start creating ar support for it, you no longer need it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The same Abovitz that did this abomination of a TEDx talk ... https://youtu.be/w8J5BWL8oJY
Frank Zappa wrote a song about the Magic Leap investors: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_WgCGOWae4 https://www.google.com/search?q=cocaine+decisions+lyrics&oq=...
Man the 70s were special.
Back in October, when Facebook made a lot of "metaverse" noise, I wrote a thread looking at the history of stereoscopic 3D from the 1850s to the present as a way of explaining why I think facehugger VR is going nowhere. Somebody turned up to complain that going back to the Civil War era wasn't sufficiently big picture for him: "You need a long view. All the serious players are still in the Mercury phase. The Gemini a…
Read your thread, but I don't think you have quite the right idea. There's certainly a long history of static 3D imaging with photography and then movies. But that's not all that related to the modern tech started by the Oculus Rift. Yeah, 3D doesn't make photography or movies fundamentally different for the most part, because with some rare exceptions we already can fill in the blanks. Consumer VR itself is a pretty…
If you want to suggest this time it's different, you have to explain why it's different. My point is pretty simple: Stereoscopic 3D is an attractive nuisance. There are many times historically people have confused its admitted novelty value with actual utility. There is every reason to think this is one of those times.
Facehugger VR is a marriage of two concepts: 3D virtual worlds and stereoscopic imaging. There is lots of proof that the first is hotly desired; anybody who has tried to pry a kid away from Minecraft or Roblox knows that, and I was the same way with Doom and Quake. But there is very little evidence that stereoscopic 3D has more than novelty value. And there's 150 years of evidence that people, even very smart people, confuse that novelty value with something that will last.