8 ms·

Video of it in action here (?): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIiTfdqCUIY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIiTfdqCUIY

rndn 12y ago
Here is the product website with three promo videos on it: http://www.microsoft.com/microsoft-hololens/en-us http://www.microsoft.com/microsoft-hololens/en-us
- GrantS 12y ago
  It's interesting how they go out of their way to describe this as NOT augmented reality when... that's exactly what it is. The only time the term appears on the product page is here: "Microsoft HoloLens goes beyond augmented reality and virtual reality by enabling you to interact with three-dimensional holograms blended with your real world. " I understand the marketing reasons for this, but contrast this with the fact that Oculus embraces the term "virtual reality" despite the baggage that comes with it and the fact that they can't trademark it. I guess AR never caught the public imagination like VR did.
  - drzaiusapelord 12y ago
    AR is traditionally a 2D projection on 3D space. This is a 3D projection that you interact with. Sure, its still AR on some level, but I think differentiating the product makes a lot of sense. My idea of AR is a boring HUD-like system that fits in with things like flying fighter jets. This holographic projection is different and notably so. MS could find the middle ground between lush 3D VR-like environments and the real world. I find things like the Oculus and other HMDs to be terribly claustrophobic and dizzying. Not to mention really asocial. I don't want to mount a tissue-box size thing to my face that removes the real world. I'd prefer having the real world still here with the digital world tied to it. There just seems to be something wrong with giving software my entire field of view. I don't want to stare into the same Unity3D generated environments. I want to augment my real world life, not replace it.
    - TheTaO 12y ago
      When we say virtual reality, there is this implicit expectation (at least in my mind) that its an always ON experience. The Video here did show some of that too but I think scoping it to specific tasks at least initially would be very powerful. So you don't wear these bulky, dorky glasses/headsets all day long but only when you need to do specific things. And then you return to your normal life. In the early days of computer, the usage was like that...very task oriented. When you are done you go back to your non-digital life. It's only when the technology and public perception changes, you start carrying PCs in your pocket all day long like we are doing today.
      - dedward 12y ago
        Right - but let's say they get less dorky and more comfortable - and really do have the visual quality we really want - objects look solid and real. That seems much more useful than a VR that you have to plug out of the real world and immerse yourself in - at least for collaboration with others on real world things... like the example with the motorbike design.
    - kingmanaz 12y ago
      >MS could find the middle ground between lush 3D VR-like environments and the real world. Back around 2000 a Slashdot article reported an attempt to create a human-sized hamster ball constructed of a semi-opaque projection-friendly surface. The ball would sit on some sort of roller mount. Five projection screens surrounding the ball would project a virtual environment over the "port", "starboard", "fore", "aft", and "north" surfaces. A human occupant would enter the ball, and, based on his movement detected through the roller base, be presented with a continually updating holodeck-like virtual environment. Perhaps something like this is still in development somewhere.
      - bglazer 12y ago
        Search around for omnidirectional treadmills. There are quite a few different models in development.
- nostromo 12y ago
  Reminds me of Google Glass's concept video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5R1snVxGNVs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5R1snVxGNVs I think Google over-promised initially which lead to many being underwhelmed with Glass. I hope Microsoft isn't making the same mistake here.
  - arcticfox 12y ago
    As far as I can tell, a big difference is that Google's concept video looks very little like actually using it, whereas Microsoft's is clearly just a better version of their live demo. The live demo was amazing.
    - rasz_pl 12y ago
      Project natal videos were also amazing.
      - fphhotchips 12y ago
        Project Natal was amazing. The Kinect dialled most of the cool stuff down for cost reasons.
  - fullofstack 12y ago
    What it reminds me of, is Google Project Tango, which also has the NASA's JPL listed as a partner[1]. Also worth mentioning, is Johnny Lee, who worked for Microsoft Kinect, and is now working at Google for project Tango. [1]https://www.google.com/atap/projecttango/#partners https://www.google.com/atap/projecttango/#partners
    - kefka 12y ago
      We have a Tango tablet. First thing, it crashes, a lot. We're talking 2-5 minutes active 3d scanning before the structure sensor driver bites the big one. Requires killing and restarting service along with all programs associated. Also had hard freezes as well. Its "google quality" in other words, crap. It might get better. It probably won't, given their track history regarding consumer devices in "google beta" (read as alpha).
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- tayeed 12y ago
  In the NASA promotional video, the project lead says they plan to implement the tech in July.
- digi_owl 12y ago
  Makes me think of something i read about from CES. Basically a helmet of sorts where you dropped a smartphone into a slot at the top, and some semi-transparent lenses in front of wearer's eyes then made the phone screen appear to float in front of said wearer. Edit: found an article about it: http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/132280-seer-the-augmented-reality-helmet-that-makes-you-feel-like-iron-man http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/132280-seer-the-augmented-re...
- mkolodny 12y ago
  I think this type of AR / holographic technology has many, many more potential real-world applications than VR. With VR, you're shutting yourself off from the outside world. Here, you're enhancing the outside world with technology. You still get to interact with others. Using HoloLens doesn't stop you from doing almost anything. What I'm curious to find out is whether HoloLens will run into the same core problem as Glass. People are afraid of people wearing Glass. They're scared that they're being filmed, or worse. Unless HoloLens can avoid making you stand out - by looking like regular glasses, or even contact lenses - I'd guess that HoloLens will end up suffering the same fate as Glass.
  - pyrocat 12y ago
    I noticed that the promo videos all show you doing things indoors, in more or less private settings. Your living room, your kitchen, your workspace. Contrasted to initial Google Glass video (skydiving, jogging, meeting for lunch .etc) I think it's safe to say Microsoft has learned from Google's mistakes.
    - beobab 12y ago
      I noticed this too. It avoids a whole class of problems interacting with other people, and seems like a good idea marketing-wise. I was also thinking about battery life. If it's not designed for outside, then presumably you'll be near a charger, so you're less likely to run out of charge when you need it.
  - threeseed 12y ago
    From the videos HoloLens looks like being an actually well thought out product unlike Glass. Many people would find tools like these incredibly useful at work, in the car or at home. But not in the street, at the beach or in restaurants whilst talking to other people. That's just socially awkward/insensitive.
  - sillysaurus3 12y ago
    It's hard to understand how AR / holographic technology could help people in their day-to-day life. There are a zillion potential uses, but all of them seem extremely complicated and hard to pull off. Take the example of fixing your car. For example, performing your own oil change, or replacing your alternator. That seems like a perfect use case for holo, right? The goggles would tell you what needs to be done and what the next step is. But that would involve so many technical challenges that it seems very difficult. You, as the creator of FixYourCar holo app, would need need to detect what type of car the user is looking at, what part of the car they're looking at, render an overlay with the correct orientation, and so on. And at the end of all of that, it's not entirely clear that your app is more helpful to them than if they'd just look up a list of steps for fixing their car using their mobile phone. I guess what I'm asking is, what do you think holo's killer app would be?
rbanffy 12y ago
With the camera, it's easy to understand how they make the objects feel solid - they just overlay it over the video feed. How would that work on the glasses, I have no idea. Does it have LCD shutters that block incoming light where they want to add a "solid" object?
- pharke 12y ago
  If you pause at 9 seconds in and check out the rig they're using to film the feed where the virtual objects are visible, it looks as though they are using the same lenses that are on the goggles to display the virtual objects in front of what the camera is recording. So I would bet that what we are seeing in the video is exactly what the user is seeing and not something added on the fly by other means.
  - zo1 12y ago
    That is amazing. So you have two (or more) people that hook into the same "scene", with the kick being that they see it from a different angle. Wow, very nice.
    - hirsin 12y ago
      This was something that I think will be a bigger deal. They can communicate with one another, and potentially split the processing load. I'd love to play an RTS where my device processes my pieces, I see their backs and my opponent sees their fronts. Of course, the caveat there would be that my command console would be invisible or hidden still from my opponent. Providing selective vision would make for interesting game possibilities.
    - rasz_pl 12y ago
      http://technicalillusions.com/ http://technicalillusions.com/
  - rbanffy 12y ago
    Nope. Those lenses are above the camera's main lenses. Whatever those circles do, they are not generating the images for the video. Plus, only one would be needed for that - the camera has only one "eye".

rndn 12y ago

Here is the product website with three promo videos on it: http://www.microsoft.com/microsoft-hololens/en-us http://www.microsoft.com/microsoft-hololens/en-us

GrantS 12y ago
It's interesting how they go out of their way to describe this as NOT augmented reality when... that's exactly what it is. The only time the term appears on the product page is here: "Microsoft HoloLens goes beyond augmented reality and virtual reality by enabling you to interact with three-dimensional holograms blended with your real world. " I understand the marketing reasons for this, but contrast this with the fact that Oculus embraces the term "virtual reality" despite the baggage that comes with it and the fact that they can't trademark it. I guess AR never caught the public imagination like VR did.
- drzaiusapelord 12y ago
  AR is traditionally a 2D projection on 3D space. This is a 3D projection that you interact with. Sure, its still AR on some level, but I think differentiating the product makes a lot of sense. My idea of AR is a boring HUD-like system that fits in with things like flying fighter jets. This holographic projection is different and notably so. MS could find the middle ground between lush 3D VR-like environments and the real world. I find things like the Oculus and other HMDs to be terribly claustrophobic and dizzying. Not to mention really asocial. I don't want to mount a tissue-box size thing to my face that removes the real world. I'd prefer having the real world still here with the digital world tied to it. There just seems to be something wrong with giving software my entire field of view. I don't want to stare into the same Unity3D generated environments. I want to augment my real world life, not replace it.
  - TheTaO 12y ago
    When we say virtual reality, there is this implicit expectation (at least in my mind) that its an always ON experience. The Video here did show some of that too but I think scoping it to specific tasks at least initially would be very powerful. So you don't wear these bulky, dorky glasses/headsets all day long but only when you need to do specific things. And then you return to your normal life. In the early days of computer, the usage was like that...very task oriented. When you are done you go back to your non-digital life. It's only when the technology and public perception changes, you start carrying PCs in your pocket all day long like we are doing today.
    - dedward 12y ago
      Right - but let's say they get less dorky and more comfortable - and really do have the visual quality we really want - objects look solid and real. That seems much more useful than a VR that you have to plug out of the real world and immerse yourself in - at least for collaboration with others on real world things... like the example with the motorbike design.
  - kingmanaz 12y ago
    >MS could find the middle ground between lush 3D VR-like environments and the real world. Back around 2000 a Slashdot article reported an attempt to create a human-sized hamster ball constructed of a semi-opaque projection-friendly surface. The ball would sit on some sort of roller mount. Five projection screens surrounding the ball would project a virtual environment over the "port", "starboard", "fore", "aft", and "north" surfaces. A human occupant would enter the ball, and, based on his movement detected through the roller base, be presented with a continually updating holodeck-like virtual environment. Perhaps something like this is still in development somewhere.
    - bglazer 12y ago
      Search around for omnidirectional treadmills. There are quite a few different models in development.
nostromo 12y ago
Reminds me of Google Glass's concept video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5R1snVxGNVs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5R1snVxGNVs I think Google over-promised initially which lead to many being underwhelmed with Glass. I hope Microsoft isn't making the same mistake here.
- arcticfox 12y ago
  As far as I can tell, a big difference is that Google's concept video looks very little like actually using it, whereas Microsoft's is clearly just a better version of their live demo. The live demo was amazing.
  - rasz_pl 12y ago
    Project natal videos were also amazing.
    - fphhotchips 12y ago
      Project Natal was amazing. The Kinect dialled most of the cool stuff down for cost reasons.
- fullofstack 12y ago
  What it reminds me of, is Google Project Tango, which also has the NASA's JPL listed as a partner[1]. Also worth mentioning, is Johnny Lee, who worked for Microsoft Kinect, and is now working at Google for project Tango. [1]https://www.google.com/atap/projecttango/#partners https://www.google.com/atap/projecttango/#partners
  - kefka 12y ago
    We have a Tango tablet. First thing, it crashes, a lot. We're talking 2-5 minutes active 3d scanning before the structure sensor driver bites the big one. Requires killing and restarting service along with all programs associated. Also had hard freezes as well. Its "google quality" in other words, crap. It might get better. It probably won't, given their track history regarding consumer devices in "google beta" (read as alpha).
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
tayeed 12y ago
In the NASA promotional video, the project lead says they plan to implement the tech in July.
digi_owl 12y ago
Makes me think of something i read about from CES. Basically a helmet of sorts where you dropped a smartphone into a slot at the top, and some semi-transparent lenses in front of wearer's eyes then made the phone screen appear to float in front of said wearer. Edit: found an article about it: http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/132280-seer-the-augmented-reality-helmet-that-makes-you-feel-like-iron-man http://www.pocket-lint.com/news/132280-seer-the-augmented-re...
mkolodny 12y ago
I think this type of AR / holographic technology has many, many more potential real-world applications than VR. With VR, you're shutting yourself off from the outside world. Here, you're enhancing the outside world with technology. You still get to interact with others. Using HoloLens doesn't stop you from doing almost anything. What I'm curious to find out is whether HoloLens will run into the same core problem as Glass. People are afraid of people wearing Glass. They're scared that they're being filmed, or worse. Unless HoloLens can avoid making you stand out - by looking like regular glasses, or even contact lenses - I'd guess that HoloLens will end up suffering the same fate as Glass.
- pyrocat 12y ago
  I noticed that the promo videos all show you doing things indoors, in more or less private settings. Your living room, your kitchen, your workspace. Contrasted to initial Google Glass video (skydiving, jogging, meeting for lunch .etc) I think it's safe to say Microsoft has learned from Google's mistakes.
  - beobab 12y ago
    I noticed this too. It avoids a whole class of problems interacting with other people, and seems like a good idea marketing-wise. I was also thinking about battery life. If it's not designed for outside, then presumably you'll be near a charger, so you're less likely to run out of charge when you need it.
- threeseed 12y ago
  From the videos HoloLens looks like being an actually well thought out product unlike Glass. Many people would find tools like these incredibly useful at work, in the car or at home. But not in the street, at the beach or in restaurants whilst talking to other people. That's just socially awkward/insensitive.
- sillysaurus3 12y ago
  It's hard to understand how AR / holographic technology could help people in their day-to-day life. There are a zillion potential uses, but all of them seem extremely complicated and hard to pull off. Take the example of fixing your car. For example, performing your own oil change, or replacing your alternator. That seems like a perfect use case for holo, right? The goggles would tell you what needs to be done and what the next step is. But that would involve so many technical challenges that it seems very difficult. You, as the creator of FixYourCar holo app, would need need to detect what type of car the user is looking at, what part of the car they're looking at, render an overlay with the correct orientation, and so on. And at the end of all of that, it's not entirely clear that your app is more helpful to them than if they'd just look up a list of steps for fixing their car using their mobile phone. I guess what I'm asking is, what do you think holo's killer app would be?

rbanffy 12y ago

With the camera, it's easy to understand how they make the objects feel solid - they just overlay it over the video feed. How would that work on the glasses, I have no idea. Does it have LCD shutters that block incoming light where they want to add a "solid" object?

pharke 12y ago
If you pause at 9 seconds in and check out the rig they're using to film the feed where the virtual objects are visible, it looks as though they are using the same lenses that are on the goggles to display the virtual objects in front of what the camera is recording. So I would bet that what we are seeing in the video is exactly what the user is seeing and not something added on the fly by other means.
- zo1 12y ago
  That is amazing. So you have two (or more) people that hook into the same "scene", with the kick being that they see it from a different angle. Wow, very nice.
  - hirsin 12y ago
    This was something that I think will be a bigger deal. They can communicate with one another, and potentially split the processing load. I'd love to play an RTS where my device processes my pieces, I see their backs and my opponent sees their fronts. Of course, the caveat there would be that my command console would be invisible or hidden still from my opponent. Providing selective vision would make for interesting game possibilities.
  - rasz_pl 12y ago
    http://technicalillusions.com/ http://technicalillusions.com/
- rbanffy 12y ago
  Nope. Those lenses are above the camera's main lenses. Whatever those circles do, they are not generating the images for the video. Plus, only one would be needed for that - the camera has only one "eye".