https://www.magicleap.com/_next/images/e14acd33a1d6136786b0b...
Ask yourself why a company would only release a 3D render when it's meant to be finished before the end of the year ("Shipping in 2018").
https://youtu.be/m-Tp8-CAxPI?t=6m8s
These companies also frequently market with 3D models:
- apple.com
- ikea.com
I watched a couple of minutes of that video and couldn't see any physical representations of the product. Can you link to the point in the video where the device is shown?
Compare this with the launch of the Oculus Rift, where you had multiple public iterations before the release of the CV1. To me, that's a sign that you had a company that was interested in pushing forward the medium. At the moment there's no clear indication that Magic Leap have developed anything beyond the current market leaders in AR (HoloLens, etc...) in terms of user experience (aside from a smaller form factor).
Sure, but those companies have long track records of shipping stuff.
Actually, to my knowledge, Apple doesn't do this. All their product photography are photos of real objects.
I know that historically a lot of their photos that look like renders are real photographs, but I thought the general consensus was that they had almost completely shifted to renders.
Instead of putting energy into this I'd suggest pointing the energy towards creating something yourself.
To the Magic Leap Team - I am a believer :-) especially if you nail the stuff that others don't focus on like smooth interaction models (i.e. voice, gesture, 6DOF mobile controller etc.)
People claim that their products can solve all sorts of interesting problems every day, and it's easy to get excited. But if they cannot demonstrate that their product actually can do what they say it does, then people are going to get suspicious.
Combine the lack of transparency with the long lead times that consumer hardware devices tend to have, and people will start wondering why nobody has been allowed to interact with a live demo of the product when it's supposed to be available to anyone within 9 months.
Everyone wants a product like this to work, but we're also worried about getting taken in by little more than slick marketing; that's how you get companies like Theranos.
"The product doesn't exist. The only image of the device on that Creator page is a 3D render"
..about a company that has received over $2billion in funding is pretty childish.
If Magic Leap are watching and want to send the team here at R01 a Creators Edition we'd be really happy to start creating on the LuminSDK with UE4 and represent here in London.
Anyone from @magicleap.com - feel free to use the chat widget at the bottom left of our site to get in touch (http://realityzero.one).
Edit: took Trolls comment off - because I realised, ironically , I was now the one being overly negative. Sorry about that.
Based on what you know about the Magic Leap to date, if you had the money to invest would you do so?
Tim Sweeney, CEO of Epic Games and head geek for Unreal Engine 4, must have tried Magic Leap One and he doesn't strike me as someone who just goes ahead and drinks the Kool-Aid. I guess we'll all have to wait and see.
Apologies for annoying so many people here. Now I'm getting down-voted into oblivion :-(
We don't complain about companies as long as Theranos about their technology.
Sorry, I meant to write "as long as they're honest about their technology".
It smacks of when Theranos supporters were shrieking down suggestions of malfeasance.
>>Instead of putting energy into this I'd suggest pointing the energy towards creating something yourself.
attitude. Just because I don't play football doesn't mean I cannot criticize the coach. Just because I'm not in politics doesn't mean I cannot criticize politicians.
Lots of promises, lots of hype, a crap ton of money poured into it... and then basically nothing of substance for years.
Eventually, when it is finally released it'll likely be very underwhelming (so far they really are just showing normal hardware for the space, so they're already there).
It's not surprising people are negative - they've given us nothing to be positive about and lots to criticize. I'm more suspicious of those who are positive about them at this point.
I, for one, /did/ try creating something at that company. Instead all I got was a cut in pay, overwork, and a lack of career prospects while still being required to play roles with rediculous levels of responsibility under working conditions even OSHA would find intolerable.
Mind you, this was all happening while being told that my many years of experience actually shipping consumer products at other companies was worthless and that the failed leadership forklifted from Nokia would save the day as they proceeded to continue making short-sighted decisions and ignoring the experience they hired.
No, I will /happily/ sit back and watch and heckle. And why am I not starting my own thing? Because when they fail to deliver the ill-defined "magic" they so heartily promise, they will destroy an entire field I used to have faith in actually taking off. Funding will dry up and VCs will turn away after this fiasco.
Believe what you want, but keep your accusations of lack of trying to yourself.
What's your take on the current push with the SDK coming out? Do you think this signals that they're really getting ready to ship something, or do you feel that they're still unready based on what you saw there?
Did this have anything to do with a certain renovation?