4 ms·

> For AR, I can see it as a technology used in business a lot more than for the consumer. I'll be the first to criticize VR for being expensive, but the Holole

by zamalek 10y ago

> For AR, I can see it as a technology used in business a lot more than for the consumer. I'll be the first to criticize VR for being expensive, but the Hololens is absurd - you'd think that Microsoft would have paid attention to the Glass stillbirth. Oculus pulled off $600 devkits, which gave VR a fighting chance. AR has no fighting chance right now, not at that price, not with so few devs making apps (and many of the issues in the article still apply).

iLoch 10y ago
It's hardly fair to compare the technology in the Oculus to what's in HoloLens. The HoloLens is an x86 PC that fits on your head and has 5 cameras, 4 microphones and a depth sensor and lasts several hours on a single charge (which is important because it doesn't need to be plugged into a $2000 PC.) I also haven't seen anyone get sick from HoloLens or trip over anything while using one. I wouldn't be surprised if the price point of HoloLens is absurdly high for a very specific reason: to stop people from thinking it's consumer technology - it isn't - not yet. And if that's Microsoft's strategy then I'd say it's a smart move. As a HoloLens developer you have to focus your efforts on enterprise and practical applications. Not gimmicks, because there's no money in that.
fsloth 10y ago
Hololens is not for consumers. It's for businesses which benefit from any off-the-shelf AR, e.g. construction, and Hololens is very much appreciated in that field. From my POV in providing software for construction industry Hololens has huge potential. Will it become a just a fad, or an irreplaceable tool, remains to be seen.
cr0sh 10y ago
Personally, I don't look at current consumer VR as expensive. But this is because I have the perspective of having played around with DIY VR back in the mid-1990s. Back then, the only way you could have gotten anything -close- to what we have now, would have been to drop about $50k on hardware. Even then, it still would have been lacking. Today, you can get a much better experience in your home for under $5k. To me, that's astounding. Sadly, we still don't know what to do with it - beyond games and a few other gimmicky things. There has yet to be that "must have" application for VR - we don't have a "photoshop" or "desktop publishing" or whatever you want to call it application yet - at least for the consumer. For the consumer, it's mainly about video games, and maybe some kind of "social VR" - but that's about it, for now. Those applications (except for the "hardcore") don't justify the price. I'm not sure there is an app that could.

by zamalek 10y ago

iLoch 10y ago

It's hardly fair to compare the technology in the Oculus to what's in HoloLens. The HoloLens is an x86 PC that fits on your head and has 5 cameras, 4 microphones and a depth sensor and lasts several hours on a single charge (which is important because it doesn't need to be plugged into a $2000 PC.) I also haven't seen anyone get sick from HoloLens or trip over anything while using one. I wouldn't be surprised if the price point of HoloLens is absurdly high for a very specific reason: to stop people from thinking it's consumer technology - it isn't - not yet. And if that's Microsoft's strategy then I'd say it's a smart move. As a HoloLens developer you have to focus your efforts on enterprise and practical applications. Not gimmicks, because there's no money in that.

fsloth 10y ago

Hololens is not for consumers. It's for businesses which benefit from any off-the-shelf AR, e.g. construction, and Hololens is very much appreciated in that field. From my POV in providing software for construction industry Hololens has huge potential. Will it become a just a fad, or an irreplaceable tool, remains to be seen.

cr0sh 10y ago

Personally, I don't look at current consumer VR as expensive. But this is because I have the perspective of having played around with DIY VR back in the mid-1990s. Back then, the only way you could have gotten anything -close- to what we have now, would have been to drop about $50k on hardware. Even then, it still would have been lacking. Today, you can get a much better experience in your home for under $5k. To me, that's astounding. Sadly, we still don't know what to do with it - beyond games and a few other gimmicky things. There has yet to be that "must have" application for VR - we don't have a "photoshop" or "desktop publishing" or whatever you want to call it application yet - at least for the consumer. For the consumer, it's mainly about video games, and maybe some kind of "social VR" - but that's about it, for now. Those applications (except for the "hardcore") don't justify the price. I'm not sure there is an app that could.