4 ms·

I see the main problem with wearables in the type of media we like to consume. Text and images are almost always rectangular and 2D. It makes a lot more sense t

I see the main problem with wearables in the type of media we like to consume. Text and images are almost always rectangular and 2D. It makes a lot more sense to present that on rectangular devices which you can touch (key to the success of the iphone). Wearable glasses have advantanges for 3d media but those really just make up for a fraction of the media consumed.

xoa 4y ago
What? A wearable display with a basic liquid crystal as well to control opacity can trivially do a normal rectangle too, anywhere you want. It's a complete superset of all current displays, that's the most basic use of it. Doing 3D stuff or whatever if anything strikes me as by far the least important, at least for quite a while after intro most of its use would be simple HUD or just using what we've got except wherever. Right now as I type this I'm sitting at a desk in front of a 5k 27" rectangle. With refined retinal scanning display glasses, I could be sitting on a couch or somewhere else, and still have a 27" 5k equivalent rectangle to pull up (or 36" 8k or whatever I wanted) rather then a 6-7" display (phone) or 14-16" (notebook) at much lower resolution. Decent wireless keyboards and mice exist and could be further improved on. Can you explain why people think "3D" is an important aspect of these? AR/VR would already pay for itself just by being able to bring up my desktop (or smaller individual windows or anything) anywhere, more efficiently.
- HellDunkel 4y ago
  Wearable displays can do that but they were not designed to do that. Its called „augmented“ or „virtual“ REALITY for a reason. Focus is an issue in regard to legibility even if you dont use the 3d space. If you do you get even more issues with tracking, stabilizing, more focus issues as you generate defocus, filtering, occlusion limited fov and more. These devices are designed for rendering believable dinosaurs into natural environments. It will take a while until they deliver on the promise.
  - pharke 4y ago
    I have no problem using the desktop display mode on my Oculus Quest 1, it's sharp enough that I can comfortably browse the web or use other apps. It's not as clear as my main physical display so I don't use it exclusively. The displays on the Quest 2 are better and many people use Virtual Desktop with their Quest. I'm expecting Cambria to be yet another notch above that and if it's good enough and if they've really nailed the comfort and weight I'm going to ditch my monitor and switch over to Cambria + Airlink to my desktop. My point is, we're already there and companies like Meta are already targeting these devices as display killers and the next iteration of productivity platforms.

xoa 4y ago

What? A wearable display with a basic liquid crystal as well to control opacity can trivially do a normal rectangle too, anywhere you want. It's a complete superset of all current displays, that's the most basic use of it. Doing 3D stuff or whatever if anything strikes me as by far the least important, at least for quite a while after intro most of its use would be simple HUD or just using what we've got except wherever. Right now as I type this I'm sitting at a desk in front of a 5k 27" rectangle. With refined retinal scanning display glasses, I could be sitting on a couch or somewhere else, and still have a 27" 5k equivalent rectangle to pull up (or 36" 8k or whatever I wanted) rather then a 6-7" display (phone) or 14-16" (notebook) at much lower resolution. Decent wireless keyboards and mice exist and could be further improved on. Can you explain why people think "3D" is an important aspect of these? AR/VR would already pay for itself just by being able to bring up my desktop (or smaller individual windows or anything) anywhere, more efficiently.

HellDunkel 4y ago
Wearable displays can do that but they were not designed to do that. Its called „augmented“ or „virtual“ REALITY for a reason. Focus is an issue in regard to legibility even if you dont use the 3d space. If you do you get even more issues with tracking, stabilizing, more focus issues as you generate defocus, filtering, occlusion limited fov and more. These devices are designed for rendering believable dinosaurs into natural environments. It will take a while until they deliver on the promise.
- pharke 4y ago
  I have no problem using the desktop display mode on my Oculus Quest 1, it's sharp enough that I can comfortably browse the web or use other apps. It's not as clear as my main physical display so I don't use it exclusively. The displays on the Quest 2 are better and many people use Virtual Desktop with their Quest. I'm expecting Cambria to be yet another notch above that and if it's good enough and if they've really nailed the comfort and weight I'm going to ditch my monitor and switch over to Cambria + Airlink to my desktop. My point is, we're already there and companies like Meta are already targeting these devices as display killers and the next iteration of productivity platforms.