Hacker News Reader

Comment by DANK_YACHT | Hacker News Reader

I find Tilt Five[0] to be 100x more interesting than Dynamic Land. They don't serve entirely the same purpose, but I think it illustrates the difference between clinging to the past (Dynamic Land) and embracing a digital future (Tilt Five). Both solutions are powered by projectors and sensors, but Tilt Five pushes the envelope a lot further than Dynamic Land.

[0] https://www.tiltfive.com/

View on HN

Conversely, I find Tilt Five to be nowhere near as interesting to me as Dynamic Land. Tilt Five doesn't push the envelope on computing further as far as I can see, but rather is just an expensive game peripheral for windows and android phones; Dynamic land is attempting to develop and enable new forms of media, especially communal media. The two projects shouldn't be held in the same breath IMO.

Besides, the Tilt Five developer program YouTube commercial[1] is the worst. It's like an xbox 360 reveal video at CES or a Qualcomm presentation about digital natives.

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-7lHqyBQeg

I’ll have a look at this, thank you.

In what ways do you feel like TiltFive supersedes what Dynamic Land is doing?

[EDIT]: After reviewing the marketing materials, it looks to me that this project is orthogonal to the goals of Dynamic Land, and they don’t really serve the same purpose.

1) Dynamic Land is intended to allow for computing by interacting with real physical objects, and seeing the outputs displayed back in the real world without augmented reality hardware.

2) TiltFive seems intended to allow for holographic display of traditional or specialized game content onto physical objects. More like advanced AR than tangible or physical computing .

I guess my point is that what Dynamic Land is doing is not compelling, so there will never be a perfect analog to compare it to, unless you compare it to another initiative that is also not compelling. Maybe Dynamic Land makes a cool demo, but the approach isn't capable of producing anything generally interesting. As far as I can tell, there have not been any updates on the initiative since 2019, so it looks like Dynamic Land might be dead. What I find interesting about Tilt Five is that they bring computation into the physical space. It might not be tactile, but it's at least usable for something. Another comparison to Dynamic Land is that Dynamic Land tries to create computation in one shared environment. Tilt Five, on the other hand, allows two people in separate physical environments to share a digital environment. These are just two examples of how a digital-first approach is more compelling than Dynamic Land's analog-first approach.

> I guess my point is that what Dynamic Land is doing is not compelling

Have you used it? My gut feeling is that Dynamicland is likely something that has to be experienced to be understood. I saw Bret Victor present on Dynamicland at a design conference, and there are tons of little happy and unexpected accidents that come from people using it and experiencing it. It's stuff that you can't throw into bullet points.

You're creating an artificial dichotomy here with empty buzzwords.

What exactly makes one the opposite of the other?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com