i suspect the tech for AR (as opposed to VR) was just not there yet. and prob is still not. looks cool? check. works well/reliably? uhhhhhh. some of the pro

i suspect the tech for AR (as opposed to VR) was just not there yet. and prob is still not. looks cool? check. works well/reliably? uhhhhhh. some of the problems that Tesla is having with self-driving seem reminiscent of what the AR tech needs to deal with -- just in terms of, the problem space is stubborn -- how to get much more compute power into a much smaller footprint? maybe you can piggyback on a nearby computer/phone, but then you're strapped in -- you need near-real-time communication, so no networking tech except a cable is going to work, so now you're physically bound to a workstation as you try to move around your lab, the worksite, etc. and Apple/Cook came out and said, basically, VR is nothing, AR is everything. that was good for AR. but did it cause any movement? Snap seemed to get maybe a small lift. but is anyone actually using AR for anything in production? Maybe the 'advanced forward-looking tech division' of comglomerate 'x' gets a $100M slush fund to go out and buy and play with cool tech each year -- but it never has to use the tech in any meaningful way -- it's already an R&D write-off. prob some medical training folks are using it a bit -- train your biochem/vaccine lab workers -- that's not nothing, but... the VR space just seems much more mature, and maybe that's because it's just a much easier problem to solve. not sure - not my tech area of expertise.