3 ms·

I'm co-founder and research director of a mobile AR software company, Zappar. I blogged on Magic Leap a few weeks ago, and came to some of the same conclusions

by tb100 12y ago

I'm co-founder and research director of a mobile AR software company, Zappar. I blogged on Magic Leap a few weeks ago, and came to some of the same conclusions as the author of the gizmodo piece - namely that a device that can be like Google Glass and Oculus and everything in between could be a real game changer. I chose to call the concept "Controllable Reality" (I make no claim that I've invented the concept or the term!): http://www.zappar.com/blog/google-glass-magic-leap-and-the-ideal-ar-wearable-display/ http://www.zappar.com/blog/google-glass-magic-leap-and-the-i... Edit: I also talk a bit about the requirements for an AR experience, existing approaches to AR HMDs and the big problems to be tackled on the road to consumer adoption. I've got a PhD on the software side of AR but am not an expert on the hardware, but have sufficient knowledge to hopefully offer an interesting perspective. I'm new to HN too, so let me know if I should be posting this as a separate item or not! Simon

angersock 12y ago
Erm, what's wrong with the well-understood term "Augmented Reality"?
- tb100 12y ago
  It's more about capturing the spectrum from AR to VR in a single device. With controllable opacity (which I argue is required for a truly useful AR display) you also have the option to deliver purely VR experiences by blocking out the real world completely.
  - tfinniga 12y ago
    I bet some of it is also about expectations. If you just say AR, people think of low-poly characters in a webcam on top of a black and white checkerboard. They're not interested.
    - tb100 12y ago
      And from the video linked in the Gizmodo article, Graeme Devine claims they don't call it AR because "that is just a 2D HUD", and that's why they insist on the weird marketing phrase "Cinematic Reality". To me and most people who have been around AR for years it is very clear that registration of objects in 3D is a core part of a lot of AR experiences. That was the part of the video that struck me as most weird; that Magic Leap would make a lot of noise around AR and yet have a Creative Content VP seemingly so unaware of the existing AR field.

by tb100 12y ago

angersock 12y ago

Erm, what's wrong with the well-understood term "Augmented Reality"?

tb100 12y ago
It's more about capturing the spectrum from AR to VR in a single device. With controllable opacity (which I argue is required for a truly useful AR display) you also have the option to deliver purely VR experiences by blocking out the real world completely.
- tfinniga 12y ago
  I bet some of it is also about expectations. If you just say AR, people think of low-poly characters in a webcam on top of a black and white checkerboard. They're not interested.
  - tb100 12y ago
    And from the video linked in the Gizmodo article, Graeme Devine claims they don't call it AR because "that is just a 2D HUD", and that's why they insist on the weird marketing phrase "Cinematic Reality". To me and most people who have been around AR for years it is very clear that registration of objects in 3D is a core part of a lot of AR experiences. That was the part of the video that struck me as most weird; that Magic Leap would make a lot of noise around AR and yet have a Creative Content VP seemingly so unaware of the existing AR field.