Support NeoGAF

[DieH@rd]

Draw a HUD on my eye with sharpie if old:

Earlier this week, Facebook announced that it had acquired Oculus VR for $2 billion, and it turns out that this isn’t the only recent piece of M&A in the category of head-mounted wearable computing. Microsoft, we have discovered, has paid up to $150 million to buy IP assets related to augmented reality, head-borne computers, and related items from the Osterhout Design Group, a low-profile company that develops wearable computing devices and other gadgets, these days primarily for the military and other government organizations.

As you might remember, we first broke the news that Microsoft was looking at acquiring ODG, or part of its assets, in September 2013, at a price tag of up to $200 million, depending on what went into the deal.

Here’s what ended up happening: Microsoft was indeed in discussions with the company, and as we reported, the conversations were focused around whether Microsoft would try to buy the whole company outright or just intellectual property. Ultimately, it worked out to be the latter, for a price that TechCrunch understands is between $100 million and $150 million.

After a source told us that the deal was done, we dug a bit further and managed also to get a confirmation from Ralph Osterhout himself, the low-profile inventor, founder and head of ODG.

more @ http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/27/mi...computing-ip-from-the-osterhout-design-group/

http://www.totalxbox.com/74099/microsoft-buys-ar-headset-patents-for-100-150-million-report/


Just to be clear, this was purchase of only 6 approved and 75 in-progress patents augmented reality glasses.

 

[Tagyhag]

No surprise, VR is the future. Everyone is going to take notice.

 

[DieH@rd]

No surprise, VR is the future. Everyone is going to take notice.

VR is not AR.

AR is Google Glass or 3D/Vita/Smartphone demos, only MS wants to provide real world object tracking and placing of computer generated objects in our view [in addition to static Bing-powered HUD stats].

 

[see5harp]

$150 million seems like a drop in the bucket compared to the Occulus buyout.

 

[LX_Theo]

Augmented reality has a much farther way to go in being viable as a platform outside of tech demos (or tech demoes stretched out into full games) than VR.

 

[Stealthcobra]

when you can't create/innovate yourself, this is what you do. the worst thing to happen to gaming ever = Microsoft. just think if they put that money they just used and what they use to pay other companies to make games for them....into first party games....smh

 

[Shylock]

Is that the same as this?

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=791900&highlight=osterhout

 

[Lemondish]

$150 million seems like a drop in the bucket compared to the Occulus buyout.

Completely unrelated. This probably has more to do with Kinect than with VR.

That or they're being patent trolls. I'd put my money on expanding Kinect gaming, though.

 

[The Llama]

Daily reminder that I wish we could revamp the way software patents work.

 

[m23]

when you can't create/innovate yourself, this is what you do. the worst thing to happen to gaming ever = Microsoft. just think if they put that money they just used and what they use to pay other companies to make games for them....into first party games....smh

Because I'm sure the money for first party games comes from the same budget as this investment.

 

[commedieu]

No surprise, VR is the future. Everyone is going to take notice.

..and microsoft will be 10 years behind the craze, as usual.

 

[Mugatu]

I read that as "Microsoft has purchased $100-150 million worth of Augmented Reality pants"

i am a bit disappointed but it's my own fault.

 

[Shining Sunshine]

Got shit products? Want to remain competitive?

Buy patents.

 

[Pinko Marx]

Kinect + VR would make me buy a Bone.

 

[Kazuma Kiryu]

No surprise, VR is the future. Everyone is going to take notice.

What a bizarre first post.

 

[ThoughtsOfSpeaking]

Honestly I have more faith in AR than VR. No bulky handsets, still connected to the real world, need much less in processing power, can get far more support from devs (almost any game can at least throw the hud on the glasses) and finally, can be had much more cheaply than VR.

VR may be the future with alot of investment and patience, but AR can be successful now today for little cost relatively.

Microsoft has made the right call here.

 

[Galactic Barret]

when you can't create/innovate yourself, this is what you do. the worst thing to happen to gaming ever = Microsoft. just think if they put that money they just used and what they use to pay other companies to make games for them....into first party games....smh

Whoa.

MS should put more money into 1st party stuff, but they aren't the worst. I still give that to E.T.

 

[flkraven]

when you can't create/innovate yourself, this is what you do. the worst thing to happen to gaming ever = Microsoft. just think if they put that money they just used and what they use to pay other companies to make games for them....into first party games....smh

Such horse shit. Companies can both innovate and purchase other tech. All gaming companies purchase and absorb companies as the grow and diversify. How much had Nintendo spent on their QOL venture? How much did Gaikai cost?

 

[mrklaw]

Kinect + VR would make me buy a Bone.

Kinect + VR would make you throw up.

I wonder how likely this is for the xbox divsion? I can see it being useful for stuff like smartphones, with AR overlaid on bing search - a bit like citylens (?) on the lumias. But even then, compasses in smartphones are a bit too unreliable to properly overlay information on.

I just can't see any huge benefit to this for a game space - at least in home. For outdoor stuff where you get run over by a bus while searching for geocaches, that could be fun

 

[Atrophis]

While I think AR and wearable computing has its place alongside VR as future ubiquitous tech, it doesn't really have anything exciting to add to gaming.

 

[Mugatu]

Such horse shit. Companies can both innovate and purchase other tech. All gaming companies purchase and absorb companies as the grow and diversify. How much had Nintendo spent on their QOL venture? How much did Gaikai cost?

Agreed - this situation says more about our patent system than about individual innovation of companies or people. Every company does and to an extent has to do this.

 

[flyinpiranha]

VR is not AR.

AR is Google Glass or 3D/Vita/Smartphone demos, only MS wants to provide real world object tracking and placing of computer generated objects in our view [in addition to static Bing-powered HUD stats].

VR and AR will coincide soon enough. While they are fundamentally/technically different, we will see the same devices multitasking to do both in the future.

 

[Nafai1123]

Honestly I have more faith in AR than VR. No bulky handsets, still connected to the real world, need much less in processing power, can get far more support from devs (almost any game can at least throw the hud on the glasses) and finally, can be had much more cheaply than VR.

VR may be the future with alot of investment and patience, but AR can be successful now today for little cost relatively.

Microsoft has made the right call here.

Many would argue that it's going to take a lot longer to develop and create compelling experiences in AR vs VR. Why would I buy some glasses just so my HUD is displayed in them? At this point the only applications I see for AR are incredibly gimmicky.

 

[LukasTaves]

$150 million seems like a drop in the bucket compared to the Occulus buyout.

Oculus buyout was also a investment for R&D. This is just buying patents for a product they are supposedly developing (And most likely have more development costs than 150 million).

 

[Chobel]

I just hope MS doesn't make their AR plans exclusive to Xbone, AR is better suited for non-gaming stuff.

 

[Minions]

Fortaleza glasses here we come!

http://www.geekwire.com/2012/massive-nextgen-xbox-leak-points-augmented-reality-glasses/

 

[unapersson]

If they've bought VR patents they don't need to do anything in the space, they can just apply a patent tax to anyone who does.

 

[Foxix Von]

Maybe I'm just short sighted but I've still yet to see any practical application for this technology. Or at least a purpose that would warrant this kind of investment.

I know that they've been barking up the AR tree for a while now judging by those internal presentation slides that made their rounds, but even then I still don't see the point of it. I mean maybe if we get to the point where something like Google glass can be seamlessly integrated into a pair of glasses you already own, but I still don't see how that could ever be a more usable device than just using a smart phone.

It seems like they want to start the push with the Xbox division though and the applications there are just so, so limited. I don't understand.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I guess this makes sense for MS. They are incapable of producing a product which consumers want. So they license out patented technology instead and leech off the innovation and profits of other companies like a vampire or a parasite. This is how they make their real money in mobile. They make more money from patent trolling the Android device manufacturers than they do from Windows Phone.

 

[LukasTaves]

Kinect + VR would make you throw up.

I wonder how likely this is for the xbox divsion? I can see it being useful for stuff like smartphones, with AR overlaid on bing search - a bit like citylens (?) on the lumias. But even then, compasses in smartphones are a bit too unreliable to properly overlay information on.

I just can't see any huge benefit to this for a game space - at least in home. For outdoor stuff where you get run over by a bus while searching for geocaches, that could be fun

Even for non movement related interactions like hands manipulation, or kicking some thing in the virtual world?

 

[Bessy67]

I just hope MS doesn't make their AR plans exclusive to Xbone, AR is suited better for non-gaming stuff.

Their recent push has been one experience for all your devices, so I wouldn't be surprised to see AR glasses that work with all their Windows stuff.

I guess this makes sense for MS. They are incapable of producing a product which consumers want. So they license out patented technology instead and leech off the innovation and profits of other companies like a vampire or a parasite. This is how they make their real money in mobile. They make more money from patent trolling the Android device manufacturers than they do from Windows Phone.

Or they developed it on their own in house and didn't want to deal with possible copyright infringements so they just bought other similar patents.

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

VR and AR will coincide soon enough. While they are fundamentally/technically different, we will see the same devices multitasking to do both in the future.

What? No!
VR requires a screen in front of you eyes. It requires that you don't see and hear anything from the actual reality and only see and hear the virtual reality.

Augmented reality is just stuff projected into your vision. You see the actual environment that you're in while using Augmented reality.

 

[see5harp]

Oculus buyout was also a investment for R&D. This is just buying patents for a product they are supposedly developing (And most likely have more development costs than 150 million).

Yea, obviously they've been working on their Kinect plus glasses idea for a while. Time will tell what it ends up being, but really I can't think of a single situation where AR was cool.

 

[Bsigg12]

I just hope MS doesn't make their AR plans exclusive to Xbone, AR is suited better for non-gaming stuff.

If they are still pursuing their Fortaleza plans, then this will start out on the Xbox One and as the tech matures and is able to be handled by phones/itself for data then it'll move outside living rooms.

 

[Angelus Errare]

*Reads OP*
*Ctrl+F*
*“VR”*


Not.even.surprised.

 

[Canis lupus]

Kinect + VR would make me buy a Bone.

Kinect is too slow to do VR.

 

[Ol No Bones]

I can't wait to see everyone's power level.

 

[gamechanger87]

Is that the same as this?

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=791900&highlight=osterhout

Yes.

"Original OP backs out of thread"

 

[ricardokenshin]

I think people can't figure out the difference between AR and VR in this thread.

I think all this AR stuff would be great if it didn't need an Xbone nearby. Something like google glass, a HUD for your everyday activities. Make your life more like a video game.

 

[Ol No Bones]

Kinect is too slow to do VR.

Well that's what everyone is saying. Was there a paper on this or something?

 

[Bheaze]

Hopefully this means IllumniRoom. I reckon AR has more to offer than VR, plus you don't have to wear a huge bulky headset.

 

[BigBearJohnson]

Kinect + VR would make me buy a Bone.

I agree with this. Being able to see some kind of representation of your own body in te digital space is the kind of total immersion that other VR solutions can't handle. Kinect 2 can.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Or they developed it on their own in house and didn't want to deal with possible copyright infringements so they just bought other similar patents.

This is unlikely considering MS's history. They are not an innovator company. They only start developing something when they see someone else doing it and realize they need to be there too.

 

[RayMaker]

I doubt MS and the X1 will be able to achieve this, but using AR to fill the real world with bad guys/characters is more exciting then VR, because AR could be used outside and have multiple people participate.

 

[BadWolf]

Not sure why they are going for this when it doesn't seem to have done much for Ps3, Vita, 3DS etc.

And AR doesn't sound very impressive next to stuff like Morpheus.

 

[Bheaze]

This is unlikely considering MS's history. They are not an innovator company. They only start developing something when they see someone else doing it and realize they need to be there too.

We've known about MS working on VR/AR glasses for years... Fortezela glasses anyone?

 

[Handy Fake]

Example of Augmented Reality, as opposed to VR:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Go9rf9GmYpM

 

[mrklaw]

Maybe I'm just short sighted but I've still yet to see any practical application for this technology. Or at least a purpose that would warrant this kind of investment.

I know that they've been barking up the AR tree for a while now judging by those internal presentation slides that made their rounds, but even then I still don't see the point of it. I mean maybe if we get to the point where something like Google glass can be seamlessly integrated into a pair of glasses you already own, but I still don't see how that could ever be a more usable device than just using a smart phone.

It seems like they want to start the push with the Xbox division though and the applications there are just so, so limited. I don't understand.

for games, I agree. But for real world applications it could be very useful.

Imagine something like google glass, but with the ability to overlay information across the entire lens area. Combine with gyro/compass so it knows where you are looking. So now if you want to know where the nearest bus station is, or coffee shop, you can just look and walk towards it. It could overlay routes on the ground in front of you and (of course) overlay targetted ads on billboards or shop windows.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

We've known about MS working on VR/AR glasses for years... Fortezela glasses anyone?

That's a strange way to look at it. MS didn't seem the least bit interested in AR until after Google unveiled Google Glass. They won't be interested in VR until after Oculus Rift or Project Morpheus become consumer products.

 

[pr0cs]

ITT trollin'

seriously though, did anyone actually read the OP and source URL?

...sheesh...