It reminds me of the Novint Falcon so many years ago. Really cool technology that nobody wanted.
It reminds me of the Novint Falcon so many years ago. Really cool technology that nobody wanted.
There's a big research project to figure out some basic interaction primitives for VR, and there won't be any uniquely powerful VR experiences until after the first round of that work is complete.
> why VR
1) Humans like feeling like we're nearby to other people we like. Ask anyone in a long distance relationship. VR will start a price war between digital and physical spaces. $800 for a single plane ticket vs. $800 for two headsets so you can sit in the same room as your kids doing their homework back in the Philippines every night.
2) Body language is the basis for much of our communication. The reason Google Hangouts, conference calls, etc, don't work as well as being in an office together is we rely on eye contact and posture to do turn taking, communicate emotional context, etc. VR with eye contact and finger tracking would give physical work spaces a huge run for their money.
Basically: VR puts virtual spaces on the same playing field as physical spaces. Not automatically better in any case, but able to compete. Right now virtual spaces mostly compete in a separate arena.
As a slogan: Eye contact is the killer app of VR.
Having tried a Hololens though, I'm certain that AR can improve in a direction where it would replace my laptop. I wouldn't like to use it for games, though.
http://blogs.valvesoftware.com/abrash/why-you-wont-see-hard-...
This is only true if you limit your AR HMD design to beamsplitter + projector. There are existing prototypes [1] which demonstrate quite accurate lcd based occlusion for darkening the environment on a per-hmd-pixel basis.