Comment by PaulHoule | Hacker News Reader

Comment by PaulHoule | Hacker News Reader

AR is a really tough problem. Go read this blog to find out why

https://kguttag.com/

It is very hard for AR to compete with conventional entertainment. The headset costs roughly $2000 and a $2000 investment in home theater is certainly going to improve most people's enjoyment of TV, movies, video games, etc. The $2000 headset doesn't have a lot of software, image quality doesn't compete with a $200 TV.

Like other companies in the field, ML has pivoted towards enterprise uses.

https://www.magicleap.com/en-us/

Certainly those exist and could deliver enough value to pay for the headsets. For instance if you could read the manuals on a headset while you work inside a jet engine that could be helpful. If you could see the plans for a building under construction overlaid over the building it might save expensive mistakes. On the other hand, Microsoft contracted to sell a bunch of Hololens 2 to the US Army and it hasn't worked out so well

https://www.roadtovr.com/report-microsoft-hololens-ivas-fiel...

Facebook has gotten dominant market share in VR headsets because it has sold headsets below cost. That's not a sustainable business plan. People are skeptical about their plans for both AR and VR and some think that this is mainly a feint aimed to distract people away from their current problems.

From my perspective watching their marketing, Magic Leap did over-hype / under-define the product's utility. Their original use-case appeared to be everything and their tech predictably missed it.

Contrast to the tech https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4f8ZZv_j_c&t=3390s that Karl G appears to give kudos to on his site https://kguttag.com/2021/11/19/awe-2021-part-1-tilt-5-was-ma.... It has a rough-edge which is overtly used as a product attribute: the "game board" is required ... detail: it is made of the common micro-spherical retro-reflective (road-sign) surface, leading to a relatively low $400 barrier-to-entry. These trade-offs appear to be smart.

Q: How did Tilt5 take the "smart" path and Magic Leap the "way of pain?" (whimsy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QCNEzFpIrP8)

Personally I think the cultural demand of AR can be met by other means.

For instance a phone can lock on to QR codes in the environment and add content over what the camera sees. (I have content that is good to go for this model but I gotta learn ARKit and fight with the App Store to get it to you.)

I went to an interactive art exhibit (imagine some hippies are making Disneyland on a shoestring budget) that scanned a sand table with a Kinect and projected contour lines on top of them. Disney can reskin Space Mountain quickly by just projecting something else.

It seems to me that people aren’t doing everything they can with projectors either directly onto surfaces or using half mirrors like “Pepper’s Ghost”. These are mainstream for musical performances but I’d like to see somebody do a sketch comedy routine with one.

> Q: How did Tilt5 take the "smart" path and Magic Leap the "way of pain?"

Im a huge fan of Jeri Ellsworth, but even Tilt5 didnt have a "smart" path despite using a cheaper approach to doing AR by orienting more for a projection screen approach and focusing on games - they started out as a kickstarter for CastAR (as the Technical Illusions company), went through the VC path with Playground Global, had issues with that path and went out of business, then Jeri (and possibly partners) bought the distressed assets of CastAR at auction to relaunch as Tilt5. It's been a nearly nine year or more journey IIRC.

Listen to https://theamphour.com/394-jeri-ellsworth-and-the-demise-of-... for more info.

Won't surprise me at all if that hololens thing ultimately fails. I remember thinking at the time I first heard about it that it didn't seem like a value add. I was in the Army and I don't think anyone who hasn't humped around with a full gear kit understands how much those guys are already carrying. The plates, helmet, magazines, and camelbak are worth it, because they're keeping you alive. If you're gonna ask to have yet another 5 pound device mounted to that helmet, it better add a whole lot of value, and I don't see how it does. These wearable HUD devices will eventually become viable when they can be integrated with existing eye protection lenses and flight helmets without obstructing the view you already have or adding more weight, but they're gonna need to get a lot smaller before that happens. I'm thinking more along the lines of projecting an overlay onto a contact lens than the bulky headsets that exist today.

Edit: I should note that even the contact lens idea would fail for a lot of military applications. Ground troops aren't allowed to wear contacts due to sanitation issues. But they'd work well for rear guard headquarters staff and garrison maintenance techs.

What I heard is that soldiers couldn’t fire their rifles the way they usually do when wearing the headset and that’s a big problem.

The airforce probably wins the most badass use of AR: https://imgur.com/gallery/ZPJoF4Z

The best use cases for AR _are_ enterprise use cases, IMO. AR seems to be a natural way to interact with design, instruction, warnings, etc. it is not obvious that the same features yield much for the entertainment user, because AR provides an interface and information.

I think AR is the natural heir to things like turn by turn navigation, but in cases where visual aids can help a process.

The irony with Karl’s blog is that he’s done nearly a 180 on Magic Leap with the debut of their second product. They’ve ironically becciome relevant again, just not in the consumer space at all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com