Support NeoGAF

[SerTapTap]

Microsoft is really fond of making things up and using terms that don't mean anything, yet can be very appealing to the general public. You have to remember that "Blast Processing" worked really well for kids in the schoolyard in the 90s. Same principle here.

They're going to keep saying holographic because that's Star Trek Holodeck stuff and makes the product sound magical. Just like "The Power of the Cloud" was used to make people think Xbox One had the Hot Graphics of a million computers in your living room.

They usually don't completely bullshit on the windows side of things though. I don't recall any made up promises about cloud for Windows and the features that are there work fine and are useful. They've been doing great with Windows and Surface (3) lately so it's disappointing to see so much bullshit forced along with a device that is on it's own quite interesting.

Because, to be honest, that's what I would do too if I was working in their PR department *embarrased*

Good PR uses accurate terms to convey the intent of the product. Evil PR uses inaccurate terms to gussy it up. You can do proper PR without straight up lying to people. MS chose to lie.

 

[Justin Bailey]

I'm just excited that we even get to have this argument. Hooray future.

 

[TheSlySoul]

I'm just excited that we even get to have this argument. Hooray future.

Yeah, I am looking more forward to see what it can do.
Arguing what the tech is seems petty.

 

[Flai]

Is the "add a 2D UI in front of what you view" (ie, Google Glass) and "add 3D objects/UI into the enviroment that you view" (ie, HoloLens) both called AR? Is there any word to differentiate between the two?

 

[Cheeseman Battitude]

Someone somewhere is going to find a pornographic use for it.

 

[TheSlySoul]

Someone somewhere is going to find a pornographic use for it.

You joke, but history has shown whatever format porn supports does pretty well. Porn was only on Blu-Ray you see...

 

[Trigonometrize.]

I can actually almost see where they're coming from. Traditional AR is just seeing on a screen both the real world represnted on the screen + projections, while with this there are no screen representations for the enviroment. They are different. However, probably not different enough to declare that it's not AR.

 

[Alx]

Is the "add a 2D UI in front of what you view" (ie, Google Glass) and "add 3D objects/UI into the enviroment that you view" (ie, HoloLens) both called AR? Is there any word to differentiate between the two?

No, the fact that the info is 2D or 3D isn't actually important. As long as the displayed information is relevant to the real world, it's AR. The Dragon Ball Z power meters are AR, for example. ^_^

 

[digdug2k]

Are people buying into this? I don't see how it isn't AR. It might be the best AR ever, but does Microsoft know what a hologram is?

Spoiler

Hint: it doesn't use a headset.

Do you not know how PR works? You say what you want. Yes, people buy into it. They don't have any choice. There's some part of your brain that just loves to believe the shit spewed out by PR departments. That's why they exist.

 

[aeolist]

IT'S NOT REAL HOLOGRAPHY STOP CALLING IT THAT

 

[Krejlooc]

They're wrong, it's AR.

 

[onQ123]

Quite frankly the vast majority of AR stuff is "MR" and yet would be labeled and marketed as AR. MS is just trying to communicate that their stuff is like nothing else out there.



AR is not by definition strictly restricted to non-interactive stuff.

Where are you finding this definition of AR that requires it to not be interactive?

AR is when you overlay the real world with the virtual word & AV is when you overlay the the virtual world with the real world. when you can do both because the virtual world has some sense of where it's at in the real world it's Mixed Reality.

 

[Flai]

Yeah, the fact that the info is 2D or 3D isn't actually important. As long as the displayed information is relevant to the real world, it's AR. The Dragon Ball Z power meters are AR, for example. ^_^

Well in my opinion there definitely should be a different word for those, since they are very different (and the "HoloLens" -way requires a lot more hardware, like depth sensing cameras, accelerometer etc other sensors).

The 3D AR should be called...

Spoiler

HOLOGRAPHIC REALITY

!

 

[bj00rn_]

Evil PR uses inaccurate terms to gussy it up. You can do proper PR without straight up lying to people. MS chose to lie.

Oooooooooooook.... This is a little bit too crazy for me, I'm out of here..

 

[Natureboy99]

Do you not know how PR works? You say what you want. Yes, people buy into it. They don't have any choice. There's some part of your brain that just loves to believe the **** spewed out by PR departments. That's why they exist.

I guess it's the same thing Nintendo did with this:

The problem with both is you are creating false expectations.

 

[STEaMkb]

Fighter pilots have been wearing AR helmets for years. Here is BAE Systems latest Striker head-mounted display.

The BBC has been given behind the scenes access to BAE Systems' Rochester plant, where they manufacture the latest model of digital, smart helmets designed for jet fighters. These allow pilots to see an "augmented reality" view of the airspace around them, thanks to a system of LEDs on the helmet, sensors in the cockpit and cameras mounted outside the plane.

It allows them to visualize enemy fighter craft through dense could, among other things. All this hologram talk is silly and unnecessary.

 

[Vlade]

Is the "add a 2D UI in front of what you view" (ie, Google Glass) and "add 3D objects/UI into the enviroment that you view" (ie, HoloLens) both called AR? Is there any word to differentiate between the two?

I'd say yes, very much so, which is why i am not yet offended by this PR.

 

[killer rin]

To be fair, I don't blame them from trying to put distance between themselves and every other AR product which has failed... But its AR with all (most) the capabilities of VR

 

[harSon]

Why can't you blame a company for employing stupid PR spin?

I do it all the time.

Eh, it's effective though. Tech companies wouldn't continually try and differentiate/rebrand their already existing tech into into something seemingly new and exciting, despite that not actually being the case, if that weren't weren't true.

 

[GeoGonzo]

Whenever I glance at this thread's title I find myself clenching my jaw. Ugh. Just... ugh.

Kind of reminds me of some devs who said something like "These aren't really mechs, guys! They're way more agile". I can't remember if it was for Titanfall or Hawken.

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

It's both. It's hijacking your normal vision to insert virtual things (VR). This is different from say projecting a hologram into the space to let your eye perceive it naturally. Though it still anchors things to a real environment which is AR.

That's literally just AR

 

[Oppo]

To be fair, I don't blame them from trying to put distance between themselves and every other AR product which has failed... But its AR with all (most) the capabilities of VR

I can't think of any AR products that have been big failures; I can barely think of any at all, and they're early. castAR is the only one that comes to mind immediately.

Anyways out me on #teamdumb for this PR speak, it's silly and unnecessary, and doesn't really clarify anything to the layman either.

 

[koutoru]

They literally just described the definition of AR.

It's not like Microsoft is stupid either, their engineers know it's AR too.
They're just being told not to call it that.

 

[davitpr]

It's AR on VR Goggles. Whatever it is, it's not holograms Microsoft. A hologram is Princess Leia being projected by R2 D2. Not this.

Also, you're not integrating holograms into nothing, you are integrating CGI into the real world, so yes, it's AR.

 

[Ol No Bones]

The only thing worse than tech buzzwords is people who incessantly complain about it. They can call is Mixed Reality if they want. It isn't a shady practice and describes what they are doing just fine.

 

[SRTtoZ]

MS trying to trick people with PR again, like the Cloud 30X POWER BS or whatever they said.

 

[Kaydan]

It sounds like Mixed Reality, according to wikipedia:

Mixed reality (MR), sometimes referred to as hybrid reality[1] (encompassing both augmented reality and augmented virtuality), refers to the merging of real and virtual worlds to produce new environments and visualisations where physical and digital objects co-exist and interact in real time. Not taking place only in the physical world or the virtual world,[1] but a mix of reality and virtual reality, encompassing augmented reality and augmented virtuality.[2]

 

[DopeyFish]

Its MR dudes

 

[efyu_lemonardo]

PR like this should be regarded as a sin.
It amounts to actively making the masses more ignorant in order to increase profits.

 

[Mechanical Snowman]

Augment - verb (used with object)
1.
to make larger; enlarge in size, number, strength, or extent; increase

Augment
verb
make (something) greater by adding to it; increase.

aug·ment
(ôg-mĕnt&#8242
v. aug·ment·ed, aug·ment·ing, aug·ments
v.tr.
1. To make (something already developed or well under way) greater

mixed/mɪkst/
adjective
consisting of different qualities or elements.

So MS marketing their AR device as 'mixed reality' just implies that nothing of value will be added, gj marketing team.

 

[dose]

Microsoft, it's not holograms.

 

[onQ123]

I would say it's quite the opposite, AR has a specific requirement of being aware of the real world, so the displayed information will match with it. Can't augment reality if you don't know what kind of reality you're dealing with.

If it's just AR it wouldn't know if my hand is in front of it or behind it. it would stay on the screen but because it's MR & includes AV (Augmented virtuality) my hand from the real world can augment the AR that's augmenting the real world.

 

[BeatResetsTheWorld]

If it's just AR it wouldn't know if my hand is in front of it or behind it. it would stay on the screen but because it's MR & includes AV (Augmented virtuality) my hand from the real world can augment the AR that's augmenting the real world.

It's intelligently designed AR, but it's still just AR. It's like saying VR without directional audio or accurate motion controls isn't VR because it's not fully realized

 

[Pound_lb003]

It's marketing.

 

[Alx]

I gave it some more thought (because I dislike when things don't make sense), and went back to something that bothered me already in their original presentation, and I think I understand what they're getting at finally, even if I still don't agree. I also went to read the original quote at Gamespot, and it isn't as much trying to say "it's not AR" as "it's more than your regular AR/VR"

Notice how in their three examples, they make a distinction between holograms, virtual environments and augmented reality.

If you go back to the original purpose and meaning of AR, it is indeed augmenting reality, ie adding information on real objects of your environment. Displaying a 3D object in thin air isn't really augmenting anything though, so even if we've called it AR for years (/ex when displaying objects on QR cards), they decide not to, and call that hologram instead.
One could argue that displaying a virtual character jumping on a table isn't really "augmenting" the table either. Or maybe it is, if you consider it's adding entertainment value to it. But that's a stretch in both cases.

So for MS :
- Minecraft demo = augmented reality (because attached to the reality of the table) (fine by me)
- 3D modeling demo = hologram (virtual objects float "on their own") (debatable... I'd still call it AR even if the only reality is the user's environment)
- Mars demo = "virtual environments" (not attached to reality either, but simulating a whole environment rather than an object) (why not... it's basically VR, but with the limitations of a device not specialized for it)
- Lightswitch demo = augmented reality (textbook definition of AR) (fine by me)

In the end I think it would be more honest to call all of that AR, except for virtual environments which is VR.

 

[E-Cat]

This is some "infinite power of the cloud" tier bullshittery. Just stahp.

 

[Horp]

Thats PR

 

[onQ123]

It's intelligently designed AR, but it's still just AR. It's like saying VR without directional audio or accurate motion controls isn't VR because it's not fully realized

No!


OK if a virtual item appears to be in the real world it's AR & if I stick my hands out & it show up in the virtual world that is AV. so what happens when there is virtual items overlaying the real world then I stick my hands out & that overlay the virtual items that's overlaying the real world?


do you just call it AR & ignore the fact that it's also AV? no it's MR.

Calling it MR doesn't mean that it doesn't feature AR but the fact that it also does AV makes it MR.

 

[Froli]

It's AR. Freaking PR spin again

 

[JimboJones]

It's HolARgrams™

 

[Shin-Ra]

Fighter pilots have been wearing AR helmets for years. Here is BAE Systems latest Striker head-mounted display.



It allows them to visualize enemy fighter craft through dense could, among other things. All this hologram talk is silly and unnecessary.

"Halolense brings home JET FIGHTER technology usually costing tens of thousands of dollars."

 

[Bitch Pudding]

Microsoft: Hololense isn't VR or ARv

Seems like we'll be the judge of that...

 

[Nafai1123]

I'm not saying it's AR...


...but it's AR.

 

[onQ123]

I'm not saying it's AR...


...but it's AR.

It features AR but it also features AV. It's a MR headset.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Microsoft clearly wants the hologram idea to stick since it has been a fantasy tech for so long. But a hologram is projected, and needs no headgear. I would be really excited if they invented that.

It reminds me of what they did with Kinect and the "your body is the controller" slogan. Kinect was a minor upgrade to camera motion controls, which had been around a long time. In the end people have dismissed Kinect, even though MS tried to cram it down our throats. This feels the same way to me. Deceptive description of a device thats marginally better than other headsets and will likely be dismissed eventually, especially if someone invents a real consumer grade hologram projector.

MS tries so hard to create an Apple like Reality Distortion Field of their own... Almost cute .

 

[Josman]

"It's not AR"

*describes it with a textbook definition of AR*

It's annoying that they're calling it holograms

 

[Vlade]

I gave it some more thought (because I dislike when things don't make sense), and went back to something that bothered me already in their original presentation, and I think I understand what they're getting at finally, even if I still don't agree. I also went to read the original quote at Gamespot, and it isn't as much trying to say "it's not AR" as "it's more than your regular AR/VR"



Notice how in their three examples, they make a distinction between holograms, virtual environments and augmented reality.

If you go back to the original purpose and meaning of AR, it is indeed augmenting reality, ie adding information on real objects of your environment. Displaying a 3D object in thin air isn't really augmenting anything though, so even if we've called it AR for years (/ex when displaying objects on QR cards), they decide not to, and call that hologram instead.
One could argue that displaying a virtual character jumping on a table isn't really "augmenting" the table either. Or maybe it is, if you consider it's adding entertainment value to it. But that's a stretch in both cases.

So for MS :
- Minecraft demo = augmented reality (because attached to the reality of the table) (fine by me)
- 3D modeling demo = hologram (virtual objects float "on their own") (debatable... I'd still call it AR even if the only reality is the user's environment)
- Mars demo = "virtual environments" (not attached to reality either, but simulating a whole environment rather than an object) (why not... it's basically VR, but with the limitations of a device not specialized for it)
- Lightswitch demo = augmented reality (textbook definition of AR) (fine by me)

In the end I think it would be more honest to call all of that AR, except for virtual environments which is VR.

the possibility of the device CONSTRUCTING the environment, and use that info, as you use it is what i'm hoping the distancing from what exists is alluding to.

 

[SystemUser]

This reminds me of people that say that Last of Us and 28 Days Later don't have zombies.

 

[Raist]

I gave it some more thought (because I dislike when things don't make sense), and went back to something that bothered me already in their original presentation, and I think I understand what they're getting at finally, even if I still don't agree. I also went to read the original quote at Gamespot, and it isn't as much trying to say "it's not AR" as "it's more than your regular AR/VR"



Notice how in their three examples, they make a distinction between holograms, virtual environments and augmented reality.

If you go back to the original purpose and meaning of AR, it is indeed augmenting reality, ie adding information on real objects of your environment. Displaying a 3D object in thin air isn't really augmenting anything though, so even if we've called it AR for years (/ex when displaying objects on QR cards), they decide not to, and call that hologram instead.
One could argue that displaying a virtual character jumping on a table isn't really "augmenting" the table either. Or maybe it is, if you consider it's adding entertainment value to it. But that's a stretch in both cases.

So for MS :
- Minecraft demo = augmented reality (because attached to the reality of the table) (fine by me)
- 3D modeling demo = hologram (virtual objects float "on their own") (debatable... I'd still call it AR even if the only reality is the user's environment)
- Mars demo = "virtual environments" (not attached to reality either, but simulating a whole environment rather than an object) (why not... it's basically VR, but with the limitations of a device not specialized for it)
- Lightswitch demo = augmented reality (textbook definition of AR) (fine by me)

In the end I think it would be more honest to call all of that AR, except for virtual environments which is VR.

Well their language is rather debatable and a bit all over the place.
Like "the device can project a hologram into the room".
Well no, it really doesn't.

 

[PhatSaqs]

lmao great thread.