3 ms·

In my work with the HoloLens, I found that it's really best when you're augmenting the real world rather than displaying generic graphics. I know that sounds ki

In my work with the HoloLens, I found that it's really best when you're augmenting the real world rather than displaying generic graphics. I know that sounds kind of like a tautology "use an augmented reality device to augment the real world?!? What a novel idea!" But if you look closely at the extant apps on HoloLens, you will realize they are mostly VR applications that happen to be rendered in your living room. To wit, the content is not connected to the space in any way other than proximity. You can move the content somewhere else and it's the same content. Where I've found AR to really shine is in IoT settings. Take the real world with smart objects and add relevant data on top of them. That's the easiest thing to do, as the data is readily available and the UX is much more obvious than other potential use-cases. The real world becomes an anchor for the content and makes it much more believable, even when you lose the augmented graphics in the periphery as you move around. There may be other ways to augment the real world other than IoT. GIS and routing might be one, though the tech isn't solid enough yet to put in a fast moving car, on roads with wide varieties of weather conditions. Medical assistance (though not training, again, that's VR). Logistics and shipping--previous experience working in a grocery warehouse, I saw that new pickers struggle the most with finding things, and the most successful pickers have memorized the locations of things. ASIDE: I'm also very interested in augmented audio interfaces, spatialized audio through bone-conducting headphones, for a much better virtual assistant experience. I have two small kids and use Google Home a lot while I'm getting them ready to go somewhere or making them dinner. Having different reminders and features located in different parts of the house, with proper fall-off of volume, would be a huge improvement on our daily routine. What does this have to do with Magic Leap? I would be very happy if all that Magic Leap had to offer was "slightly better HoloLens". The HoloLens has been underwhelming for a lot of people, but I think even today at basically 5 years old, it still has a lot of untapped potential. ML is slightly cheaper than HL, which is always nice, and it's running an Android-like OS, which might bring more developers along (though personally I very much enjoy UWP on both desktop and MR Windows). We are so close on so many different concepts that incremental improvements can't come fast enough.

zip1234 8y ago
I would love an app that would render a 3d model in the real world. Imagine looking at the site of your new house with the latest plans from the architect and able to visualize exactly how it would look in it's surroundings.
- moron4hire 8y ago
  I recall seeing one, once, but I think it was just someone's college senior project. It looked very compelling.
- sp332 8y ago
  The Ikea app can do this for furniture. I know hololens can do this for larger objects but I don't know enough about its "app store" to know if there's one for architecture. http://elevr.com/experimental-still-lifes-and-landscape-interventions/#ali http://elevr.com/experimental-still-lifes-and-landscape-inte...
MisterTea 8y ago
> The HoloLens has been underwhelming for a lot of people, but I think even today at basically 5 years old, it still has a lot of untapped potential. I was able to play with a Hololens a few years back and although very impressive, the field of view was the showstopper. On the plus side, its spatial tracking is impressive. The Hololens viewport is equivalent to a 27 inch monitor held at arm's length whose position is locked to your head and not your eyes which move far more than your head. So you wind up moving your head around a bunch with this heavy headset. Talk about fatigue. Then add to that you can't walk up to something to get in close for a look because the viewport is at arm's length, anything in virtual space between your eyes and the viewport is out of frame and invisible. So you can't lean in for a closer look. After a while of wandering about while gyrating your weighted head around, you quickly tire of it. AR devices like these are pretty damn impressive and quite useful beyond entertainment. But they need to shed some weight, increase the viewport and therefore the immersiveness. Though, the holy grail and killer feature they really need is eye tracking. The key is to eliminate that awkward disconnect between the virtual world and reality by keeping things in line with your eyes and not your head.
- moron4hire 8y ago
  > The Hololens viewport is equivalent to a 27 inch monitor held at arm's length You must have really long arms. It's a lot worse than that. But that's why I said it's best when you augment real world objects. The focus becomes the object, it maintains the object-permanency on its own, the graphics come along for the ride. > Then add to that you can't walk up to something to get in close for a look because the viewport is at arm's length That is a per-application choice, though Microsoft does officially recommend a near-plane of no less than 1m. I've personally been able to make experiences that were comfortable at 0.5m, if the graphics were small, and again, anchored to some real-world object. Yes, better devices will make better experiences. But we have the HoloLens (and Magic Leap) right now. And clients are paying now. There is work that can be done.
  - MisterTea 8y ago
    This was about three years back I think. The measurement was a rough estimate made by walking up to a 27 inch imac until the view port disappeared which was roughly the size of the 27 screen. Perhaps I was being generous.

zip1234 8y ago

I would love an app that would render a 3d model in the real world. Imagine looking at the site of your new house with the latest plans from the architect and able to visualize exactly how it would look in it's surroundings.

moron4hire 8y ago
I recall seeing one, once, but I think it was just someone's college senior project. It looked very compelling.
sp332 8y ago
The Ikea app can do this for furniture. I know hololens can do this for larger objects but I don't know enough about its "app store" to know if there's one for architecture. http://elevr.com/experimental-still-lifes-and-landscape-interventions/#ali http://elevr.com/experimental-still-lifes-and-landscape-inte...

MisterTea 8y ago

> The HoloLens has been underwhelming for a lot of people, but I think even today at basically 5 years old, it still has a lot of untapped potential. I was able to play with a Hololens a few years back and although very impressive, the field of view was the showstopper. On the plus side, its spatial tracking is impressive. The Hololens viewport is equivalent to a 27 inch monitor held at arm's length whose position is locked to your head and not your eyes which move far more than your head. So you wind up moving your head around a bunch with this heavy headset. Talk about fatigue. Then add to that you can't walk up to something to get in close for a look because the viewport is at arm's length, anything in virtual space between your eyes and the viewport is out of frame and invisible. So you can't lean in for a closer look. After a while of wandering about while gyrating your weighted head around, you quickly tire of it. AR devices like these are pretty damn impressive and quite useful beyond entertainment. But they need to shed some weight, increase the viewport and therefore the immersiveness. Though, the holy grail and killer feature they really need is eye tracking. The key is to eliminate that awkward disconnect between the virtual world and reality by keeping things in line with your eyes and not your head.

moron4hire 8y ago
> The Hololens viewport is equivalent to a 27 inch monitor held at arm's length You must have really long arms. It's a lot worse than that. But that's why I said it's best when you augment real world objects. The focus becomes the object, it maintains the object-permanency on its own, the graphics come along for the ride. > Then add to that you can't walk up to something to get in close for a look because the viewport is at arm's length That is a per-application choice, though Microsoft does officially recommend a near-plane of no less than 1m. I've personally been able to make experiences that were comfortable at 0.5m, if the graphics were small, and again, anchored to some real-world object. Yes, better devices will make better experiences. But we have the HoloLens (and Magic Leap) right now. And clients are paying now. There is work that can be done.
- MisterTea 8y ago
  This was about three years back I think. The measurement was a rough estimate made by walking up to a 27 inch imac until the view port disappeared which was roughly the size of the 27 screen. Perhaps I was being generous.