Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

BlaineBMA t1_itkr29f wrote

I expected Google glasses to be embraced by more people and was wrong. I do suspect that these enhanced realities to become mainstream because of the obvious usefulness, but maybe first as heads-up displays in self-driving vehicles before returning to eyewear, including contacts. It just makes sense.

Meta VR appears to require more of a disconnect from reality. I understand that need but for some of us it's similar to taking drugs. I'm certain this will be embraced by a subset of the population, but for now seems like an expensive toy

1

Sirisian OP t1_itmdmuo wrote

I was very critical of Glass back then and thought it was going to poison the well of AR by having one display. I did not expect it was the camera part that showed up in the news. I keep wondering if that will comeback with MR which will have way more cameras.

I think the tablet setup for self-driving cars will probably be what we see for a while. Especially when the steering wheels are removed. The main thing is you need some form of input and touch is intuitive.

> Meta VR appears to require more of a disconnect from reality.

That's the issue of using passthrough video signals. Can't see people's eyes or anything and for enterprise and collaborative systems with people in a room it's not ideal. I don't envy the people trying to sell such systems. Hololens for enterprise is much closer to what people expect and even then the hardware is fraught with issues.

2

BlaineBMA t1_itmkyzl wrote

It sounds like we definitely think similarly about these issues, Augmented reality has a wonderful potential vs VR, Meta's shtick, sort of reminds me of dropping acid...

1