7 ms·

Real time AR streaming. We likely can't get glasses with the necessary processor down to the right form factor, but they could offload that work to a server if

Real time AR streaming. We likely can't get glasses with the necessary processor down to the right form factor, but they could offload that work to a server if you had 5g in place

Barrin92 7y ago
I feel like the last few years have been a constant letdown when it comes to consumer AR or VR. There just doesn't seem to be a lot of appetite for it even if you look at more powerful home systems. With Carmack leaving at Occulus and a lot of the startups not really amounting to anything I'm not so sure that this is just an issue of not enough mobile bandwidth.
- moron4hire 7y ago
  I feel like you don't actually pay attention to VR and are just saying what you hear in the tech press.
  - Barrin92 7y ago
    that feels unreasonably abrasive. I know one or two people in the industry who have recently left VR firms and they painted a pretty pessimistic picture for me, so I'm not just going by what I read in the press.
- JohnFen 7y ago
  > There just doesn't seem to be a lot of appetite for it even if you look at more powerful home systems. Speaking for myself, I have no actual interest in AR/VR. It doesn't bring me anything that I need or would use for more than the novelty factor. I suspect that I'm in the majority here. Where this tech shines is in niche markets -- gaming, industrial uses, and so forth.
_bxg1 7y ago
> We likely can't get glasses with the necessary processor down to the right form factor That's silly. We're already pretty close, and if they really had to offload some things then the powerful computer that's a couple feet away in your pocket would make much more sense. Plus, as I said we already stream HD video on 4G networks without much trouble.
- SkyMarshal 7y ago
  Moreover we don't have to cram all the silicon and batteries into the glasses themselves. Some of it, especially an extended battery pack, wifi and storage hardware, can be stored in a small, lightweight, slim-profile backpack that's wired to the AR glasses. Probably the rendering silicon too if the short-distance bandwidth between backpack and glasses doesn't induce too much lag. Wearing small backpacks and fanny packs while urban adventuring is not uncommon. AR companies could just bootstrap off that already existing "infrastructure" with small backs that can still carry stuff, but with AR tech also inside them.
moron4hire 7y ago
I keep hearing VR and AR listed as reasons we need 5G, but literally no one I know in this industry is saying that. If anything, VR is going to reduce bandwidth requirements for things like teleconferencing. You aren't going to stream anything to a headlocked headset over anything bigger than your LAN. Network latency will make you ill. And no, async timewarp is not the answer. That only gets you incidental movement from user to view. You still get massive latency in reactions to input, which can't be faked. Oh, I suppose maybe someone is thinking of 360 video. Not anyone I know. But could be someone.

Real time AR streaming. We likely can't get glasses with the necessary processor down to the right form factor, but they could offload that work to a server if you had 5g in place

Barrin92 7y ago

I feel like the last few years have been a constant letdown when it comes to consumer AR or VR. There just doesn't seem to be a lot of appetite for it even if you look at more powerful home systems. With Carmack leaving at Occulus and a lot of the startups not really amounting to anything I'm not so sure that this is just an issue of not enough mobile bandwidth.

moron4hire 7y ago
I feel like you don't actually pay attention to VR and are just saying what you hear in the tech press.
- Barrin92 7y ago
  that feels unreasonably abrasive. I know one or two people in the industry who have recently left VR firms and they painted a pretty pessimistic picture for me, so I'm not just going by what I read in the press.
JohnFen 7y ago
> There just doesn't seem to be a lot of appetite for it even if you look at more powerful home systems. Speaking for myself, I have no actual interest in AR/VR. It doesn't bring me anything that I need or would use for more than the novelty factor. I suspect that I'm in the majority here. Where this tech shines is in niche markets -- gaming, industrial uses, and so forth.

_bxg1 7y ago

> We likely can't get glasses with the necessary processor down to the right form factor That's silly. We're already pretty close, and if they really had to offload some things then the powerful computer that's a couple feet away in your pocket would make much more sense. Plus, as I said we already stream HD video on 4G networks without much trouble.

SkyMarshal 7y ago
Moreover we don't have to cram all the silicon and batteries into the glasses themselves. Some of it, especially an extended battery pack, wifi and storage hardware, can be stored in a small, lightweight, slim-profile backpack that's wired to the AR glasses. Probably the rendering silicon too if the short-distance bandwidth between backpack and glasses doesn't induce too much lag. Wearing small backpacks and fanny packs while urban adventuring is not uncommon. AR companies could just bootstrap off that already existing "infrastructure" with small backs that can still carry stuff, but with AR tech also inside them.

moron4hire 7y ago

I keep hearing VR and AR listed as reasons we need 5G, but literally no one I know in this industry is saying that. If anything, VR is going to reduce bandwidth requirements for things like teleconferencing. You aren't going to stream anything to a headlocked headset over anything bigger than your LAN. Network latency will make you ill. And no, async timewarp is not the answer. That only gets you incidental movement from user to view. You still get massive latency in reactions to input, which can't be faked. Oh, I suppose maybe someone is thinking of 360 video. Not anyone I know. But could be someone.