3 ms·

I don’t fully understand what the metaverse plans are, but if you look at the design of the quest pro that just released then what you say is not true. It’s an

I don’t fully understand what the metaverse plans are, but if you look at the design of the quest pro that just released then what you say is not true. It’s an AR first device that doesn’t even come with full light blockers that make it usable as a fully immersed VR device. I agree with you VR is not the future but AR definitely is, and even Apple has been making silent but consistent investments in AR for more than the past 5 years.

echelon 4y ago
> I agree with you VR is not the future but AR definitely is. It's interesting to see the differences of opinions on this subject. I believe this will pan out in the opposite direction. As a consumer, AR seems so weird to me. I don't want to put on glasses or goggles to see overlays of the world around me. I want interfaces to be simpler, not more complicated and crowded. While AR hardware has improved, the software remains reminiscent of Nintendo DS Face Raiders [1]. I'm just not being sold on a day to day use case for the tech. Maybe Apple or Meta will teach us otherwise, but I can't even imagine it at this point. I do see AR being useful for a limited number of industrial applications. You already see quasi-AR virtual film cameras working well (cameras without a lens that capture xyz-orientation in virtual space for the purpose of pointing a virtual camera). But these don't even use optical overlays. On the other hand, VR enables infinite workspaces, telepresence, new kinds of 3D creative tools that place you inside the thing you're building, world isolation, closer to full sensory immersion, etc. Rather than a tool that serves as an overlay of the existing world, it puts you into a new type of cognitive body altogether. Metaphors of movement combined with spatial reasoning can unlock new abilities for the human brain. Like gestures, but full body and mind. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bh-YrWvdUCs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bh-YrWvdUCs
- chrischen 4y ago
  Your frame of reference is based on existing implementations, but existing implementations are by definition ones which have not solved your concerns. You are looking at AR from the lens of today's optics, rather than looking at where technology is going to lead us. Will you use AR if it's light and comfortable enough? I mean, even the giant bricks of laptops and cell phones initially had users, and eventually as they got smaller they gained even more users. You can already see the advancement of AR software by holding up your iphone and trying out the various AR features that overlay things in the real world and can even use the depth sensor to occlude your hand. Or try out Google maps AR view which literally does a video game style overlay of the path you need to take over the actual world. Maybe you don't like these things, but I think they are objectively cool, and right now only held back by a lack of hardware to make it convenient to do AR in every day scenearios (lightweight glasses or goggles). But, Apple is working on that, and so is Meta, and since technology advances by Moore's law it's only a matter of time before the glasses get light enough and comfortable enough that we don't have to hold up our phones awkwardly in front of our faces to do AR. Things that AR can accomplish: 1) Overlaying peoples' names so I don't have to remember so many names. Not a problem for many people but some people have a hard time remembering names. 2) Always there real world overlay of directions so you don't have to keep pulling out your phone. 3) AR games and entertainment 4) No need for giant physical 2 dimensional information displays in the real world. Once AR gets sufficiently clear and high enough resolution there is literally no need for physical displays... only virtual ones. The whole point of physical displays since inception is to show information, sometimes 3D information, on a 2D surface. We've been trying to make them smaller and smaller ever since... what better size than no size at all. 4) The whole point of any digital display is to augment our eyes with information. The ultimate display is one that is right in front of your eyes. AR is the next logical step for digital displays.
  - echelon 4y ago
    I'm still skeptical. I will give you one case where I would give in, though: automatically translating and overlaying foreign text. I'd wear a set of AR goggles if it improved the experience of visiting countries that don't predominantly speak English.
- r00fus 4y ago
  > As a consumer, AR seems so weird to me. I don't want to put on glasses or goggles to see overlays of the world around me. I want interfaces to be simpler, not more complicated and crowded. As a counter anecdote, I fully support AR - the idea of Google glass would have been very appealing for me if they could actually use the lens as the screen and it was less bulky. Perhaps it's just years of seeing heads-up displays in anime and sci-fi movies (e.g. Terminator) that's pushing my desire. If they can eventually solve the bulk and creep issue (ie, always-on camera that can surreptitiously record at will) it will become a useful addition to the phone/watch personal nimbus of data.

echelon 4y ago

> I agree with you VR is not the future but AR definitely is. It's interesting to see the differences of opinions on this subject. I believe this will pan out in the opposite direction. As a consumer, AR seems so weird to me. I don't want to put on glasses or goggles to see overlays of the world around me. I want interfaces to be simpler, not more complicated and crowded. While AR hardware has improved, the software remains reminiscent of Nintendo DS Face Raiders [1]. I'm just not being sold on a day to day use case for the tech. Maybe Apple or Meta will teach us otherwise, but I can't even imagine it at this point. I do see AR being useful for a limited number of industrial applications. You already see quasi-AR virtual film cameras working well (cameras without a lens that capture xyz-orientation in virtual space for the purpose of pointing a virtual camera). But these don't even use optical overlays. On the other hand, VR enables infinite workspaces, telepresence, new kinds of 3D creative tools that place you inside the thing you're building, world isolation, closer to full sensory immersion, etc. Rather than a tool that serves as an overlay of the existing world, it puts you into a new type of cognitive body altogether. Metaphors of movement combined with spatial reasoning can unlock new abilities for the human brain. Like gestures, but full body and mind. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bh-YrWvdUCs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bh-YrWvdUCs

chrischen 4y ago
Your frame of reference is based on existing implementations, but existing implementations are by definition ones which have not solved your concerns. You are looking at AR from the lens of today's optics, rather than looking at where technology is going to lead us. Will you use AR if it's light and comfortable enough? I mean, even the giant bricks of laptops and cell phones initially had users, and eventually as they got smaller they gained even more users. You can already see the advancement of AR software by holding up your iphone and trying out the various AR features that overlay things in the real world and can even use the depth sensor to occlude your hand. Or try out Google maps AR view which literally does a video game style overlay of the path you need to take over the actual world. Maybe you don't like these things, but I think they are objectively cool, and right now only held back by a lack of hardware to make it convenient to do AR in every day scenearios (lightweight glasses or goggles). But, Apple is working on that, and so is Meta, and since technology advances by Moore's law it's only a matter of time before the glasses get light enough and comfortable enough that we don't have to hold up our phones awkwardly in front of our faces to do AR. Things that AR can accomplish: 1) Overlaying peoples' names so I don't have to remember so many names. Not a problem for many people but some people have a hard time remembering names. 2) Always there real world overlay of directions so you don't have to keep pulling out your phone. 3) AR games and entertainment 4) No need for giant physical 2 dimensional information displays in the real world. Once AR gets sufficiently clear and high enough resolution there is literally no need for physical displays... only virtual ones. The whole point of physical displays since inception is to show information, sometimes 3D information, on a 2D surface. We've been trying to make them smaller and smaller ever since... what better size than no size at all. 4) The whole point of any digital display is to augment our eyes with information. The ultimate display is one that is right in front of your eyes. AR is the next logical step for digital displays.
- echelon 4y ago
  I'm still skeptical. I will give you one case where I would give in, though: automatically translating and overlaying foreign text. I'd wear a set of AR goggles if it improved the experience of visiting countries that don't predominantly speak English.
r00fus 4y ago
> As a consumer, AR seems so weird to me. I don't want to put on glasses or goggles to see overlays of the world around me. I want interfaces to be simpler, not more complicated and crowded. As a counter anecdote, I fully support AR - the idea of Google glass would have been very appealing for me if they could actually use the lens as the screen and it was less bulky. Perhaps it's just years of seeing heads-up displays in anime and sci-fi movies (e.g. Terminator) that's pushing my desire. If they can eventually solve the bulk and creep issue (ie, always-on camera that can surreptitiously record at will) it will become a useful addition to the phone/watch personal nimbus of data.