4 ms·

I can see VR/AR being the logical successor of this concept. Why spend $5k on a new whiteboard when magic leap turns everything into a smart screen.

Jtsummers 9y ago
Because you'd need one per viewer and no good way to handle guests without going well over the initial $5k budget.
- rob_b 9y ago
  This disadvantage will be one of the largest hurdles to overcome, dependent of course on the amount of participants and their corresponding access. Once more mainstream adoption occurs then this could be reevaluated and become a non-issue but how far away is that?.
  - sriku 9y ago
    This hurdle is not very different from people needing to have individual mobile phones to communicate with each other. Such a distributed requirement where the device is reusable across multiple contexts and not limited to a company may result in the costbeing directly borne by individuals. It might take time, but we've seen this repeatedly happen - the internet, cell phones, wifi, cameras (ever snap whiteboard pics?)
nimchimpsky 9y ago
magic leap ? didn't they burn up in a haze of fire and lies ?
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
ferongr 9y ago
Because one of these things actually exists and the other does not?
lowglow 9y ago
I actually agree. I was using my Vive / Tilt Brush to whiteboard design some systems architecture[0], and it felt very natural to want to collaborate and share with both local and remote parties. 3D is such a more robust experience when designing that it just feels magnitudes of order better. [0] https://www.facebook.com/dpgailey/videos/10103011916576896/ https://www.facebook.com/dpgailey/videos/10103011916576896/ [edit] And I'd also say that having "one per viewer" would be just as easy to use the cheaper headsets/phone combos for passive or voice only participants.

4 ms·

I can see VR/AR being the logical successor of this concept. Why spend $5k on a new whiteboard when magic leap turns everything into a smart screen.

by godzillabrennus 9y ago

Jtsummers 9y ago
Because you'd need one per viewer and no good way to handle guests without going well over the initial $5k budget.
- rob_b 9y ago
  This disadvantage will be one of the largest hurdles to overcome, dependent of course on the amount of participants and their corresponding access. Once more mainstream adoption occurs then this could be reevaluated and become a non-issue but how far away is that?.
  - sriku 9y ago
    This hurdle is not very different from people needing to have individual mobile phones to communicate with each other. Such a distributed requirement where the device is reusable across multiple contexts and not limited to a company may result in the costbeing directly borne by individuals. It might take time, but we've seen this repeatedly happen - the internet, cell phones, wifi, cameras (ever snap whiteboard pics?)
nimchimpsky 9y ago
magic leap ? didn't they burn up in a haze of fire and lies ?
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
ferongr 9y ago
Because one of these things actually exists and the other does not?
lowglow 9y ago
I actually agree. I was using my Vive / Tilt Brush to whiteboard design some systems architecture[0], and it felt very natural to want to collaborate and share with both local and remote parties. 3D is such a more robust experience when designing that it just feels magnitudes of order better. [0] https://www.facebook.com/dpgailey/videos/10103011916576896/ https://www.facebook.com/dpgailey/videos/10103011916576896/ [edit] And I'd also say that having "one per viewer" would be just as easy to use the cheaper headsets/phone combos for passive or voice only participants.