Killer Queen
Banned
.$3000? So 1.35 million $CAD, then. Perfect.
.$3000? So 1.35 million $CAD, then. Perfect.
That's actually my point, there is no display for any VR headset (or TV or anything) that can make you think you are looking at real life, because the color reproduction and black levels (and resolution) won't match reality for years. So a VR headset with a stereo camera won't be anywhere near as good as any real AR device. And until they can get FOV of a VR headset to cover your entire area of sight, there's no way people will wear a VR headset while doing everyday things.Even when you consider that the color reproduction and black levels are severely lacking?
That's not really comparable.
They just want this thing to bomb, don't they?
I was actually referring to AR HMD visuals.That's actually my point, there is no display for any VR headset (or TV or anything) that can make you think you are looking at real life, because the color reproduction and black levels (and resolution) won't match reality for years. So a VR headset with a stereo camera won't be anywhere near as good as any real AR device. And until they can get FOV of a VR headset to cover your entire area of sight, there's no way people will wear a VR headset while doing everyday things.
I was actually referring to AR HMD visuals.
While a VR headset would degrade the real world FOV and IQ, it would greatly increase the active AR fov and the color/opacity accuracy of AR elements.
I wouldn't be surprised if future VR headsets and cellphone VR solutions come equipped with a stereo camera for AR. I also wouldn't be surprised if those are more popular until AR-dedicated headsets evolve more.
Yeah, somehow, they're never 'comparable'. I mean, it's not like nascent complex technologies usually cost an arm and a leg for the earliest adopters, or anything like that
Are you presuming this iteration is intended to be mass market?
You're comparing an unproven augmented reality gaming device to televisions and smartphones. Back in 2000 and 2006, HDTVs and smartphones were the next technological step for TVs and phones, respectively. Pretty much every household in the world has a TV and every person and their dog has a smartphone these days. Phones are essential to have in the 21st century. You'd be hard pressed to find people without a smartphone nowadays. TVs are less essential, but almost every household still has them. So even though the price was high, consumers were going to be buying the newest editions of TVs and phones regardless.
You can't really compare that with Hololens. Hololens is an experimental AR gaming device. Consumers aren't going to buy it for $3000. There's no way MS is going to sell the consumer version for that much. I understand this thread is about the developer version though, so it makes sense that that the price is that high. There's no way they're going to sell the consumer version for $3000.
Yeah, I was confused by the title of this thread and assumed it was talking about the consumer version. My bad.
What, no price-gawking for the VR killer?
In all seriousness, this will be a really cool thing in 5 years.
Don't blame Clippy for your struggles.$3000? So 1.35 million $CAD, then. Perfect.
And as far as the tracking is concerned, it's downright magical. It doesn't sound like much but when you experience it yourself, it's absolutely mind blowing. You can place objects in different rooms, everything is persistent (you can walk away, power off and back on later) - everything stays exactly where you left as if it were real. Must be seen to be believed, and even with the FOV issues it still does a remarkable job of fooling your brain into believing that something is really in this physical space with you. Add to this, the fact that the device is untethered and you can walk thru a much larger area than say the Vive "room space" (or just seated in the case of Oculus)
It will have to be low-latency for sure, but that's not impossible.Viewing your surroundings via even the smallest of lags from a camera would be horrible by comparison to a device that overlays your actual vision.
What, no price-gawking for the VR killer?
In all seriousness, this will be a really cool thing in 5 years.
Man, I wish I had the money to buy this. I would love to use HoloLens in my hobby projects
It will have to be low-latency for sure, but that's not impossible.
Is it?
Lol. It has its own computer.Wow, so this thing has its own RAM or flash storage or something? Very cool.
Lol. It has its own computer.
Wait, fuck, really? I clearly haven't been paying enough attention. So you don't plug it into a PC? Very interesting. I guess I have some reading/watching to do.
I might suggest Microsoft look at how HTC/Valve distributed their Vive development kits to developers. Hint: They weren't charging them $3,000 and forcing them to write an essay.
Yeah, it's a standalone device. According to the spec sheet, it has a 32bit CPU with some new HPU thing and 2GB of RAM.Wait, fuck, really? I clearly haven't been paying enough attention. So you don't plug it into a PC? Very interesting. I guess I have some reading/watching to do.
It's supposed to be the VR killer
It's supposed to be the VR killer but why don't no one talk about the shitty colors ?
I mean, this makes sense as it projects light. You can't project 'dark' light. It's new tech, give it some time. It's not meant for watching movies.It's supposed to be the VR killer but why don't no one talk about the shitty colors ?
Contrary to every fake videos of the hololens, it can't display black et dark colors, it's limiting for a lot of applications, like watching a movie !
I found only one video which really shows how it looks like, colors are pretty bad:
Fuck a scenario, I just want to know. Also, not all apps are made for HoloLens or released for HoloLens so having Continuum would help in that regard but that's a small edge case.
But my real reason is for an idea I have for a game.
It's supposed to be the VR killer but why don't no one talk about the shitty colors ?
you can bet your butt that AR is going to be another type of device that everyone and their mother owns or endeavors to own once it has matured. It's very likely to be the 'next big thing' after self-driving vehicles. It's just gonna take some time to get there.
At which point Apple will "invent" AR with a device that's basically the same and it will sell 10 times more.
No, it's totally dependant of the AR technology. It's impossible to "project dark light" on a glass. It totaly limits the applications you can have on the device.I assume it's because it's still development device. It's not ready for consumers, and most of the videos shown are probably "spiced up" in order to show what the ambition is.
At which point Apple will "invent" AR with a device that's basically the same and it will sell 10 times more.
Magic Leap claims to be able to display black.No, it's totally dependant of the AR technology. It's impossible to "project dark light" on a glass. It totaly limits the applications you can have on the device.
How weird can it look? Compare seeing a video version of reality with seeing AR elements only in a small box in the center of your fov.Well it can be small, but it'll still look weird.
If you can't read something, just take a step closer to it. Hololens will require you to step back a greater distance to see things that can't fit in its miniscule display.Resolution is another problem.
Sure, until something like a Gear VR with stereo cameras comes out.So is power
Aren't the AR bits kind of a big deal? I'd much rather have a roomscale experience than a coffee table experience.Also, remember that VR headsets consume your entire field of vision - albeit just black in the periphery. That is going to severely hamper you compared to AR where you can see everything you could see before, plus the additional augmented stuff (which is the only bit with a limited FoV).
I think they acquisced that they didn't mean that for real, and it was more of an effect of showing a brighter color and making the negative space appear darkerMagic Leap claims to be able to display black.
I never read that. In fact, one of their patents describes how the "wave guide chip" could be used to cancel out incoming light, similar to how noise-canceling headphones cancel out sound, thus darkening part of the image.I think they acquisced that they didn't mean that for real, and it was more of an effect of showing a brighter color and making the negative space appear darker
Apple See. Calling it.
EyePhone!
Very interesting, thanks ! It would be far superior than the hololens then.I never read that. In fact, one of their patents describes how the "wave guide chip" could be used to cancel out incoming light, similar to how noise-canceling headphones cancel out sound, thus darkening part of the image.
Also, he's very clear in saying "We made black from light", it's his example of something really cool they accomplished by mixing engineers with creative-types.
https://youtu.be/bmHSIEx69TQ (important bit at 35 minutes in)
At which point Apple will "invent" AR with a device that's basically the same and it will sell 10 times more.
What, no price-gawking for the VR killer?
In all seriousness, this will be a really cool thing in 5 years.
I'm confused. Did someone from MS or Google come out recently and call AR the "VR Killer" or something? I mean, AR can't get better until VR gets better while also having to deal with its own particular set of problems. AR has nothing to do with being a VR killer.