In retrospect (at the time, even) it felt like complete BS. If you look back at the threads posted on HN, I distinctly remember people calling out their methods as super vague, and probably completely fictitious - amazing to see that the angry, dismissive comments actually turned out to be the most factually based!
The problem with Magic Leap is that it was always vaporware. I think the second you start using 3D CGI to "show what the product will be like" you're already kind of fucking up. I mean I get it, if youre building a concept car, you can't just immediately build it. But Magic Leap's videos were always like "yeah literally, it'll be like you're in Avatar."
Give me a break. I hope some mega-corp eats up the IP for like 7 cents on the dollar and actually uses some of the tech for something that sees the light of day.
The thing is, there is no way to “show” this to the masses, and there is not even a comparable experience (you can’t show oculus/vibe in an ad either, but everyone has played with a 3D display at some point even if only static - such as the red disc toy with 3D images whose name escapes me - stereoscope, maybe?)
What’s the comparable experience of something projecting into your eye?
What does buying ML buy you? The goal isn't to own a product. The goal is the product. When Google bought Android, it was a two years (and a lot of money) away from being the only sane option for manufacturers not named apple.
ML is years and billions away from (I assume) an entrant in a high-end subsector of the market.
The counter-example to google's android is MSFT's nokia/windows mobile experience. A money suck and no benefit.
It took three years from google buying android until the absolute first android phone was launched, and I'd say that when microsoft bought nokias mobile bussiness (in 2014, nine years after google bought android) it still looked like there was a chance windows would be a serious third player in the mobile OS market.
Correction taken on Android timing.