4 ms·
In what sense are they different sides of the same coin? I see AR as very practical and VR not so much. I look at everyone walking down the street trying to sim
by enos_feedler 7y ago
In what sense are they different sides of the same coin? I see AR as very practical and VR not so much. I look at everyone walking down the street trying to simultaneous look down at their phone and do other things (walk, drive, etc) and see a huge TAM for AR. Meanwhile, in 1993 I went to the local fairground in my small town and experienced VR-enabled multiplayer game of Doom. It had much lower fidelity than VR today, but if the market really wanted it, there would have been a constant pull for their technology to improve. Instead it's just been fits and starts for the past 26 years since I experienced that demo. Big tech has pumped huge money into VR the last 5 years and the uptake is just not happening.
- shafyy 7y ago> In what sense are they different sides of the same coin? One should look at AR and VR as a spectrum. Eventually, you'll be able to mix and match with the same headset. > Instead it's just been fits and starts for the past 26 years since I experienced that demo. Big tech has pumped huge money into VR the last 5 years and the uptake is just not happening. This is incorrect. The Oculus Quest is super successful measured on any conceivable metric, outperforming (sales and retention-wise) any other headset that came before it. One key barrier to adoption of VR (or any consumer tech) is convenience. The Quest is the first headset that makes it convenient to use VR, as you don't need a PC, no external trackers, but you still get the same level of immersiveness. There are other areas that need improvement until it speak to a bigger TAM (such as improved resolution, more software, better performance, better ergonomics) - but those are all problems that have a more or less clear path of solution. In 10 years, everyone will be working in VR headsets, not laptops.