Live data from Hacker News

Magic Leap One

magicleap.com

161–170 of 653 posts

Re: Magic Leap One

#161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My guess is, they are wanting more money. It's not really ready and won't ship next year. I agree something is fishy.

$1,887,500,000 should have been enough! https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/magic-leap

... and all i got was this lousy internet site.

Just kidding, the internet site is really beautiful.

Re: Magic Leap One

#162

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…

[deleted]

Re: Magic Leap One

#163

I wonder if these (in contrast with the glasses you get for a 3D film) are usable in combination with normal glasses?

Looks like they're not. From the Rolling Stone article: "the company will also take prescription details to build into the lenses for those who typically wear glasses."

That's not great at all if it means you can't share your headset.

Re: Magic Leap One

#164
post #155
post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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 as much as possible and gives each observer a unique angle, focus point.

That an actor could interact with a modern object (foam stick) that is rendered as an epoch suitable object (a longsword) would be possible.

The possibilities are really quite something, for the scenario of "each viewer has a lightfield viewer and the scene, set and objects can be rendered in real-time for them".

Re: Magic Leap One

#165
post #67
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.

The thing will need some serious tech in it, there's really no way to make it not look ugly. I think aesthetics are somewhat overrated: If a device is useful, people (including the "cool kids") will use it regardless.

You're just wrong. Aesthetics are crazy important on consumer devices. I'd argue it is THE most important aspect on something you WEAR. People put an awful lot of thought into their clothes, and accessories. Some people don't care, but they're rare. If aesthetics didn't matter there wouldn't be 100 different clothing stores in the mall. When we choose what to wear, we're annoucing to the world who we are. When you wear a suit, you're sending a message to anyone who looks at you. When you wear a flannel shirt, and dirty boots, you're sending another message.

What is the message being projected if someone looks at you wearing these glasses? Probably not one a "normal" person would want to project.

Function matters, but don't overrate fashion. People deeply care about it, and will skip the function (no matter how great it is) if it makes them look like a dork.

Re: Magic Leap One

#166
The old demo videos from a year or two ago showed that the Magic Leap could not do opaque black. Black = transparent on their clear screens.

If that's still the case, then every single example image on their site is a misrepresentation. They all show black and indicate the Magic Leap can do opacity.

I call bullshit until I see that they've solved that problem.

Re: Magic Leap One

#168

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.

That sounds only slightly larger than HoloLens tbh. For a company with this much funding and hype I expected more than just “a slightly better hololens”.

I think it hinges on whether the lightfield projection is as revolutionary as they say. All the other specs pale in comparison.

Re: Magic Leap One

#169

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. If I'd built the device as marketed I'd be concerned about giving half-baked first impressions that disrupt the hype machine, even if the device itself isn't half-baked.

[0]https://www.rollingstone.com/glixel/features/lightwear-intro... [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLtDeonCAYE

Re: Magic Leap One

#170

The first headset to give me virtual monitors that I can use day-to-day in lieu of my physical monitors will have my money in a heartbeat. I'd love to be able to carry a headset to/from work and have essentially the same multi-display experience at home/coffee shop/work/etc. I don't care if it's VR/AR.

doesn't that already exist for VR?
Post reply on HN