4 ms·
I don't see how that is particularly relevant really. Reviews of the hardware being discussed are abundant. The point of this article is to share this look back
by TaylorAlexander 3y ago
I don't see how that is particularly relevant really. Reviews of the hardware being discussed are abundant. The point of this article is to share this look back - a book review, taking what we thought of AR in the past and relating it to the present. I had never heard of this book before. That's what I got out of this. MKBHD, Casey Neistat, and all the others have done a fine job of covering the present already.
- SOLAR_FIELDS 3y agoI think it’s relevant specifically because the book itself and the points in the article are talking about physical reactions and responses to the hardware. If it was conceptually more about other things that weren’t directly related to the physical aspect of the interface I would agree with your take. Especially because the article ends with what could be constituted as a somewhat sweeping generalization that directly speaks to the physical interface aspect of the device. This isn’t like reviewing Christopher Nolan’s new psychological thriller in that you can get the basic gist of it from the SparkNotes and say something pithy about society. You need to actually try it to form an opinion when you are talking about how far or not it has come in meeting some science fiction fantasy
- buffington 3y agoIt's totally reasonable that one can observe the many videos of the AVP in use and in many real world situations with plenty of evidence of "physical reactions and responses to the hardware," and draw their own conclusions about how those compare with the book they read without owning the damn thing.