zlacker

>>gumby+(OP)
Let this be a lesson:

Working prototypes trump all theory.

I heard all silicon valley gurus stating they were "bearish on VR, bullish on "AR". This proliferated as a mantra throughout the industry. I thought they were wrong then, and believed the opposite - because I had a working VR headset that was awesome, but had only heard somewhat meh things about existing AR prototypes.

Until great AR hardware comes out, I'm still sticking with the same opinion.

>>mo1ok+V4
I've tried Hololens and it is honestly pretty amazing. The field of view really sucks but I'm sure they'll improve that, and it doesn't actually matter quite so much for AR.

But it is still a less compelling proposition than VR. The main market is games where seeing the real world is kind of pointless. Good VR is much more immersive, and being taken to another world is much cooler than seeing some floating planets or fish or whatever in an office (even though that is cool).

>>IshKeb+b9
Gaming is like the lowest on my list of applications for AR... At the top is some kind of AR desktop environment that makes spinning up and managing arbitrary virtual monitors/windows a snap.

>>Andrex+Wq
Hololens lets you do that. You can put windows on any walls. It's... cool. But not useful. Real screens are just much better. Nobody is going to pay much money to do something with AR that isn't particularly useful, and is better with existing technology.

They might pay money to do something that they literally can't do using any other technology, i.e. AR games.