What’s unfair about it? They’ve spent years making claims that turned out to be patently false, and their patents tell the story of a company that pursued somet

What’s unfair about it? They’ve spent years making claims that turned out to be patently false, and their patents tell the story of a company that pursued something better minds have failed at, and then shows them pivoting to the boring “Hololens 1.1” we see today. Other than an incredible facility with both deceptive marketing and fundraising I see no reason to give them the benefit of the doubt at this point. They’re still blathering about “photonic lightfield chips” when they’re selling run-of-the-mill waveguides. I don’t see vapor ware, there is a product, it’s just technically unimpressive and at odds with years of marketing. If they release something else there is no indication that they’re capable of producing more than incremental modifications of existing tech. Do you see some other indication outside of their marketing and fundraising to indicate otherwise? Investors were sold on visions of something completely at odds with their actual product, how is that not a huge red flag?