21–30 of 183 posts
Kinda amazing how these guys are past Series C now and still haven't released a product.
Along these lines - is there an example of a technology company that succeeded after raising so much money without proving their product in the market?
Augmented reality has been the sci-fi dream forever, but I'm really, really skeptical about its applications in real life. Not that they don't exist - the shoot-em-up game demoed in that video looks fantastic. The Gmail app looks horrendous. Worth billions? Depends on the implementation, and a demo video is very far from the real thing. I wouldn't be investing.
There has already been usage of Oculus Rift headsets during surgical procedures and medical consultations, so that patients don't have to fly halfway around the world to see the specialist for their extremely rare disorder or whatever. I can see contact lens-based augmented reality being very helpful in a surgical procedure.
Magic Leap has a patent application for "contact lenses" technology [1] Imagine if instead of having to put somewhat ridiculous and obtrusive glasses in front of your face, you could just use contact lenses that had this augmented reality capability. It would be ... life changing. [1] http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=H...
Magic Leap has a patent application for "contact lenses" technology [1] Imagine if instead of having to put somewhat ridiculous and obtrusive glasses in front of your face, you could just use contact lenses that had this augmented reality capability. It would be ... life changing. [1] http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=H...
Magic Leap has a patent application for "contact lenses" technology [1] Imagine if instead of having to put somewhat ridiculous and obtrusive glasses in front of your face, you could just use contact lenses that had this augmented reality capability. It would be ... life changing. [1] http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=H...
Do you need to demonstrate any kind of working model in order to patent something? As far as I'm aware, you don't. I look at this as an aspirational patent - frankly, exactly the kind of thing you'd see from a company with so much money they can spend all day dreaming.
This is a great example of patents being bullshit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's applications are virtually limitless. Everything from manufactoring to gaming to content consumption can change with a good augmented reality device.
Didn't people say the same about Google Glass before it came out? I know, I know - this is very far from Google Glass. But all we have is a really broad concept and some flashy demo videos. "It's going to change content consumption in a limitless way" doesn't really mean anything. Based on past predictions, the way we consume content is supposed to have been revolutionized about 100 times by now.
> the way we consume content is supposed to have been revolutionized about 100 times by now.
It has been at least once a decade for at least my lifetime (personal computers, internet, mobile)
I predict in 10 years VR/AR will be as boring as smartphones are now.
* This is largely Google's investment to cover possible future success of Facebook's Occulus or Microsoft's Hololens.
* They could have valuable non-tangible patents or employees. This is way past the "acquihire" funding levels, but perhaps the technology itself is valuable. Perhaps they get around that valuation with 100M/year in patent licensing. For perspective, IBM Research provides ~O(1B)/year in revenue from licensing patents.
* Magic leap has a technology that is going to revolutionize entertainment consumption. It could simply be good execution of augmented reality, but I don't think this is sufficient to get the market excited and stop using their mobile devices or TVs to consume a lot of entertainment. It seems like at best here it is a "better mousetrap" than Occulus or Hololens.
I'd love to hear other thoughts why this could be a useful investment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Along these lines - is there an example of a technology company that succeeded after raising so much money without proving their product in the market?
When your product has been featured in nearly every science fiction movie of the last few decades does "the market" really need to be proven?
Looking cool on TV doesn't mean it'll sell. Movie OSes have every keystroke and action make a sound and use 48pt font for everything. I wouldn't bet much on such an OS selling in the market.
Magic Leap has a patent application for "contact lenses" technology [1] Imagine if instead of having to put somewhat ridiculous and obtrusive glasses in front of your face, you could just use contact lenses that had this augmented reality capability. It would be ... life changing. [1] http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=H...
The contact lenses themselves wouldn't. Patent suggest something external would send light at the lenses if I read right
Edit: Specifically: "Referring to FIG. 17, in one embodiment it may be desirable to have a contact lens directly interfaced with the cornea, and configured to facilitate the eye focusing on a display that is quite close (such as the typical distance between a cornea and an eyeglasses lens). Rather than placing an optical lens as a contact lens, in one variation the lens may comprise a selective filter."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Along these lines - is there an example of a technology company that succeeded after raising so much money without proving their product in the market?
When your product has been featured in nearly every science fiction movie of the last few decades does "the market" really need to be proven?