Support NeoGAF

[Zaph]

Which leaves me to believe there are technical or engineering challenges involved with making to FOV larger. Just about everyone that has demoed the unit said it was amazing, but the FOV was limited. If MS was looking for feeback they have received that the FOV is too small loud and clear. It just may not be possible at the price point they need to hit to make it larger.

You know tv sizes in the 1940s and 50s were around 12-18 inches 400i or less resolution. Guess they should have said "nope this technology isn't ready lets what another 10,20 year for color and bigger size screen". I just not hung up the fov as much some. No if the core Hologram tech was reported to have problem are was different than what MS showed on stage then I would be concerned, but every report said those images are real.

I doubt anyone is thinking the FOV is what it is out of choice...

TV's weren't just a fancy display tech, or a new way of consuming the same information - it was a literal revolutionary device which no one had ever seen anything like it in the home before and changed the way almost every family entertained themselves by delivering theatrics into the home.

People aren't going to be anywhere near as forgiving for devices like HoloLens or VR because, simply put, there are so many other options available. This is why the gen1 product has to be great. Oculus knows this, Valve knows this, but apparently Microsoft didn't get the memo.

 

[TharpDaddy]

The impressions being really positive despite the fov makes me hopeful that the tech is actually there just not he fov. Hopefully they can improve on it in Hololens 2 or whatever the revisions end up being.

 

[Heigic]

But then by not buying 1.0 Microsoft would have to seriously consider if developing 2.0 is worth it.

Hololens is just Microsoft's device to show what the platform is capable of. The actual platform that is being created is Windows Holographic and third parties will develop devices for it. Microsoft doesn't seem to talk about this much though.

 

[Dreamwriter]

TV's weren't just a fancy display tech, or a new way of consuming the same information - it was a literal revolutionary device which no one had ever seen anything like it in the home before and changed the way almost every family entertained themselves by delivering theatrics into the home.

People aren't going to be anywhere near as forgiving for devices like HoloLens or VR because, simply put, there are so many other options available. This is why the gen1 product has to be great. Oculus knows this, Valve knows this, but apparently Microsoft didn't get the memo.

What?! Um, HoloLens is indeed a literal revolutionary device which no one has ever seen anything like it in the home before. There are literally no other options available, at least until Magic Leap comes out of the closet.

 

[oldergamer]

The difference here is that you can see the entire image on a television without having to move your head to place the image in your FOV. Imagine if you had to do that on a television.

Unless you are too close to it.

 

[goonergaz]

I'm sure it wouldn't have been hard to show what the user could actually see (in addition to the stage 'demo') - but of course that would make it clear how they were overselling it.

 

[Zaph]

What?! Um, HoloLens is indeed a literal revolutionary device which no one has ever seen anything like it in the home before. There are literally no other options available, at least until Magic Leap comes out of the closet.

The current HoloLens is displaying information we already have abundant access to. Around you right now, how many ways can you watch TV, play a game or check the weather? Yes, the information is being presented in a new and exciting way, but any real revolution (e.g. having the HoloLens tech within a pair of eyeglasses which augment the surroundings in your day-to-day life) is still a long way's off. My response was to the post comparing gen1 HoloLens to gen1 TV's, which is ridiculous. TV's bought mass visual entertainment into every home for the first time.

 

[timlot]

I doubt anyone is thinking the FOV is what it is out of choice...

People aren't going to be anywhere near as forgiving for devices like HoloLens or VR because, simply put, there are so many other options available. This is why the gen1 product has to be great. Oculus knows this, Valve knows this, but apparently Microsoft didn't get the memo.

Where is the real competitor to Hololens? Is Apple making? Doubtful. Google? Magic Leap is vaporware until they show something. So its hard for me criticize Hololens when there isn't an equivalent device to compare it too.

VR isn't it. VR is basically a screen with lens and some gyros. Google is doing it with a piece of cardboard and a smartphone. Samsung with Gear VR. Or for more graphical fidelity you can pick up a Rift, Vive, Morpheus, FOVE, OSVR. So many companies are jumping on VR because its easier to do.

There are some med level AR companies that have shown crude example of the tech but MS Hololens is the first to show something good enough (for the part) could ship to consumers. I'm more excited for AR tech in general whether it MS or someone else and can't wait to see how it develops over time.

 

[timlot]

My response was to the post comparing gen1 HoloLens to gen1 TV's, which is ridiculous. TV's bought mass visual entertainment into every home for the first time.

How is that ridiculous? I didn't know gen 1 TV were in every home. A 10" tv was around $500 in the 1940s Which would be around $8,000 in 2015.

 

[Rembrandt]

The current HoloLens is displaying information we already have abundant access to. Around you right now, how many ways can you watch TV, play a game or check the weather? Yes, the information is being presented in a new and exciting way, but any real revolution (e.g. having the HoloLens tech within a pair of eyeglasses which augment the surroundings in your day-to-day life) is still a long way's off. My response was to the post comparing gen1 HoloLens to gen1 TV's, which is ridiculous. TV's bought mass visual entertainment into every home for the first time.

You're completely disregarding everything else the hololens can do to focus on the few mundane activities.

 

[aaaaa0]

The Samsung Gear VR that John Carmack works on is mobile and untethered.

Can you safely walk around your house with one strapped to your face? Hololens and Gear VR are different.

 

[Truespeed]

Can you safely walk around your house with one strapped to your face? Hololens and Gear VR are different.

Why would you walk around the house with a VR device on your head? It's portable so that you can transport it easily. But, to answer your question, yes you can actually walk about the house safely with it on because it does have a camera pass through.

 

[aaaaa0]

Why would you walk around the house with a VR device on your head? It's portable so that you can transport it easily. But, to answer your question, yes you can actually walk about the house safely with it on because it does have a camera pass through.

Have you tried the camera passthrough? How does it affect balance?

Gear VR may be wireless and self contained like hololens, but they are not comparable. AR and VR are different.

Its possible to safely get up and do things with a hololens on your face. Gaming aside, that's why Hololens exists. The halo demo asked us to do exactly that by guiding us through a bunch of darkly lit hallways with waypoint markers, without people stumbling or tripping.

 

[Sticky&Sweet]

I just thought how cool it would be to play Civ V with HoloLens.

 

[mckmas8808]

It's not just FOV that has been misrepresented:

First person views lacking the correct FOV representation, but also showing the user's hand masking projections when performing gestures. Put your hand up like that and you break the magic.

These gifs are INSANE! Does Microsoft really think this is the best way to demonstrate Hololens?