4 ms·

Based on the general reception of Hololens, I wouldnt count it out. Definitely much more warmly received so far than, for example, the fizzling out of Glass. A

Based on the general reception of Hololens, I wouldnt count it out. Definitely much more warmly received so far than, for example, the fizzling out of Glass. Also, MS has some big plays in identity, app data etc and even media distribution right? Correct me if I am wrong, but while they are not dominant or 'winning', Azure Storage, AD and App Insights are pretty good services and heavily used - if not directly by the average consumer, probably indirectly being used by the services that consumer uses.

cma 11y ago
The reception has been in reaction to some very fake videos--they don't show the limited FOV, and they make the projections appear opaque even under bright stage lighting, which they aren't. Here is a video showing a third person view of the FOV; it is a bit unfair when objects are really close, because they are at the small end of the frustum pyramid, watch to the end in the immersive environment part to get full picture of how small the FOV is. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syFRdNs68s4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syFRdNs68s4 Blog post detailing the FOV measurement that went into making the video: http://doc-ok.org/?p=1223 http://doc-ok.org/?p=1223
- AdeptusAquinas 11y ago
  A good deal of the reception comes from the glowing reports of everyone who has tried it, I think. That being said, they did release a video recently that was a little more realistic of what you might get day one showing the limited FOV: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKpKlh1-en0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKpKlh1-en0
  - cma 11y ago
    I saw that video the other day, still very misleading by a factor of about 4 (in area). In that first shot, his forearm is pointing up, so his hand isn't near arms length, but the screen hand ratio looks about right for if it were at arms length. So depending on what his upper arm is doing, the FOV is about doubled (approx 60 degrees wide hoorizontal instead of ~30 degrees), giving it about 4 times too much area in the shot. To me it just reminds me of Kinect and Molyneux's Milo demo. The Minecraft demo on the table they gave for example was very misleading, because when the camera guy got close to the table, he could still get the whole thing in the shot. Standing by the table you would only actually be able to see tiny slices at a time. Some outlets have called it out as a big issue--The Verge ( http://www.theverge.com/2015/5/1/8527645/microsoft-hololens-build-2015-augmented-reality-headset http://www.theverge.com/2015/5/1/8527645/microsoft-hololens-... ), and Tested are two I've seen. I still think it is cool and it is the best that has been broadly publically demoed (Magic Leap has only been shown to a select few, and not in any kind of portable form; and at least some of their embodiments in their patents show only around 30 degree diagonal), but all the footage is misleading about FOV and most of it completely fakes occlusion. Google was guilty of the same with at least one of their big videos around a day in the life of Google Glass.
  - leoc 11y ago
    The guy who did the video and blog post, Oliver Kreylos, has tried HoloLens himself too http://doc-ok.org/?p=1223 http://doc-ok.org/?p=1223 .

cma 11y ago

The reception has been in reaction to some very fake videos--they don't show the limited FOV, and they make the projections appear opaque even under bright stage lighting, which they aren't. Here is a video showing a third person view of the FOV; it is a bit unfair when objects are really close, because they are at the small end of the frustum pyramid, watch to the end in the immersive environment part to get full picture of how small the FOV is. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syFRdNs68s4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syFRdNs68s4 Blog post detailing the FOV measurement that went into making the video: http://doc-ok.org/?p=1223 http://doc-ok.org/?p=1223

AdeptusAquinas 11y ago
A good deal of the reception comes from the glowing reports of everyone who has tried it, I think. That being said, they did release a video recently that was a little more realistic of what you might get day one showing the limited FOV: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKpKlh1-en0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKpKlh1-en0
- cma 11y ago
  I saw that video the other day, still very misleading by a factor of about 4 (in area). In that first shot, his forearm is pointing up, so his hand isn't near arms length, but the screen hand ratio looks about right for if it were at arms length. So depending on what his upper arm is doing, the FOV is about doubled (approx 60 degrees wide hoorizontal instead of ~30 degrees), giving it about 4 times too much area in the shot. To me it just reminds me of Kinect and Molyneux's Milo demo. The Minecraft demo on the table they gave for example was very misleading, because when the camera guy got close to the table, he could still get the whole thing in the shot. Standing by the table you would only actually be able to see tiny slices at a time. Some outlets have called it out as a big issue--The Verge ( http://www.theverge.com/2015/5/1/8527645/microsoft-hololens-build-2015-augmented-reality-headset http://www.theverge.com/2015/5/1/8527645/microsoft-hololens-... ), and Tested are two I've seen. I still think it is cool and it is the best that has been broadly publically demoed (Magic Leap has only been shown to a select few, and not in any kind of portable form; and at least some of their embodiments in their patents show only around 30 degree diagonal), but all the footage is misleading about FOV and most of it completely fakes occlusion. Google was guilty of the same with at least one of their big videos around a day in the life of Google Glass.
- leoc 11y ago
  The guy who did the video and blog post, Oliver Kreylos, has tried HoloLens himself too http://doc-ok.org/?p=1223 http://doc-ok.org/?p=1223 .