4 ms·

You shouldn’t need to have an empty space to support a 65 inch or larger tv to feel immersed when you’re watching my a show/movie. Similarly, you shouldn’t nee

by prng2021 3y ago

You shouldn’t need to have an empty space to support a 65 inch or larger tv to feel immersed when you’re watching my a show/movie. Similarly, you shouldn’t need to buy a big desk to support 3 big monitors just so you can multitask better. If you’re looking to replace furniture in your house and you can overlay a new sofa over your current one using AR glasses to compare the size and how the color fits with the rest of your things, wouldn’t that be great? Imagine you’re assembling a toy or furniture and AR glasses can guide you through which piece to connect where. There are so so many new possibilities as AR/VR matures.

hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
Thanks for giving examples. When I look at them one by one, though: 1. Regarding the TV, I would much prefer having a big screen TV, around which I could interact with a group of people, than having us all wear glasses in the same room to watch a movie. 2. Regarding the multi-monitor use case, I know some people have said they already use VR goggles for that, and maybe the tech will eventually get there but I'd never want to do that for long periods - the strain on my eyes and head would be horrible. 3. Regarding AR for new furniture, there are already cellphone camera apps that do this (Amazon already does this with some furniture products). I think doing this with AR goggles instead of a phone camera would be worse in nearly every way. 4. Similarly, there are already AR guides that do this with your phone camera. If anything, your points 3 and 4 really highlight to me why I think AR goggles are generally a bad idea. I agree that AR is useful in those small examples, but for those relatively short "let me just see how this would look against this physical thing" use cases, being able to quickly pull out my phone (which I already have) and put it back again when I'm done completely obliterates the need for a second dedicated piece of hardware. The only places goggles/glasses really make sense is where people will be wearing them for extended periods, and my argument is that in most cases people will not want to wear them for long periods.
- prng2021 3y ago
  My responses: 1. Imagine most of your field of view is filled with the view of a basketball game from courtside seats, a front row of a concert or boxing match, or even a movie. Imagine a movie where a train is coming from the side and you can just turn your head to follow it coming in. People value immersive experiences. That’s why we pay for IMAX tickets and surround sound Atmos speakers. I’d also say the vast majority of time you’re not watching tv with a group of people. In situations where you are, I agree VR makes less sense. 2. Fair point if the tech doesn’t improve. 3 and 4. The phone is a 3x5 rectangle that’s increasing in screen size every year. I don’t see how someone wouldn’t prefer AR that lets people move around in the real world to view something from every angle without holding a small viewfinder in front of them. Navigation to a building or within it would be much better with good AR. If I’m meeting other parents at my kids school for some event, I can’t keep track of all their names and their kids names. Overlay that information above their head using AR (assuming they share it). There are tons of other use cases I can think of. I’d say people will wear AR/VR glasses for long periods as long as they provide significant value and are comfortable. I already wear prescription glasses. If you told me the numerous AR use cases I have in mind could be included in them 10 years from now, I’d be all in.
- theshackleford 3y ago
  I am very much excited for a future workable implemtation. 1. I would much rather the opposite. Were these to be widespread like phones, id far prefer a virtual communual display all can see that when not in usage does not dictate the needs and layout of my living room the other 99% of the time not to mention the space it eats in my home. (In this case Im imagining that like the vision pro, I have pretty much full world visibility to still freely engage with those around me.) 2. This sould seem to vary upon the individual. I have no such issues today, but I know others that do, though no more than the amount of people who claim fatigue and eye strain from LCD. 3. Id rather have it be in my natural field of vision and leave my hands free. Having your hands free alone would be the complete opposite of "worse in nearly every way." for many practical applications of VR. 4. See above. The thing is though, I already wear glasses. So give it another decade or two and give me something thats almost the same size but with significantly more capabilities? Sign me up. If you aint already that way inclined, then sure, I could see the potential objections to wearing something all the time.

hn_throwaway_99 3y ago

Thanks for giving examples. When I look at them one by one, though: 1. Regarding the TV, I would much prefer having a big screen TV, around which I could interact with a group of people, than having us all wear glasses in the same room to watch a movie. 2. Regarding the multi-monitor use case, I know some people have said they already use VR goggles for that, and maybe the tech will eventually get there but I'd never want to do that for long periods - the strain on my eyes and head would be horrible. 3. Regarding AR for new furniture, there are already cellphone camera apps that do this (Amazon already does this with some furniture products). I think doing this with AR goggles instead of a phone camera would be worse in nearly every way. 4. Similarly, there are already AR guides that do this with your phone camera. If anything, your points 3 and 4 really highlight to me why I think AR goggles are generally a bad idea. I agree that AR is useful in those small examples, but for those relatively short "let me just see how this would look against this physical thing" use cases, being able to quickly pull out my phone (which I already have) and put it back again when I'm done completely obliterates the need for a second dedicated piece of hardware. The only places goggles/glasses really make sense is where people will be wearing them for extended periods, and my argument is that in most cases people will not want to wear them for long periods.

prng2021 3y ago
My responses: 1. Imagine most of your field of view is filled with the view of a basketball game from courtside seats, a front row of a concert or boxing match, or even a movie. Imagine a movie where a train is coming from the side and you can just turn your head to follow it coming in. People value immersive experiences. That’s why we pay for IMAX tickets and surround sound Atmos speakers. I’d also say the vast majority of time you’re not watching tv with a group of people. In situations where you are, I agree VR makes less sense. 2. Fair point if the tech doesn’t improve. 3 and 4. The phone is a 3x5 rectangle that’s increasing in screen size every year. I don’t see how someone wouldn’t prefer AR that lets people move around in the real world to view something from every angle without holding a small viewfinder in front of them. Navigation to a building or within it would be much better with good AR. If I’m meeting other parents at my kids school for some event, I can’t keep track of all their names and their kids names. Overlay that information above their head using AR (assuming they share it). There are tons of other use cases I can think of. I’d say people will wear AR/VR glasses for long periods as long as they provide significant value and are comfortable. I already wear prescription glasses. If you told me the numerous AR use cases I have in mind could be included in them 10 years from now, I’d be all in.
theshackleford 3y ago
I am very much excited for a future workable implemtation. 1. I would much rather the opposite. Were these to be widespread like phones, id far prefer a virtual communual display all can see that when not in usage does not dictate the needs and layout of my living room the other 99% of the time not to mention the space it eats in my home. (In this case Im imagining that like the vision pro, I have pretty much full world visibility to still freely engage with those around me.) 2. This sould seem to vary upon the individual. I have no such issues today, but I know others that do, though no more than the amount of people who claim fatigue and eye strain from LCD. 3. Id rather have it be in my natural field of vision and leave my hands free. Having your hands free alone would be the complete opposite of "worse in nearly every way." for many practical applications of VR. 4. See above. The thing is though, I already wear glasses. So give it another decade or two and give me something thats almost the same size but with significantly more capabilities? Sign me up. If you aint already that way inclined, then sure, I could see the potential objections to wearing something all the time.