In my head, I always put them in a bucket with Theranos and uBeam, Startups who made product claims which experts in their fields said were not possible.
I guess slick marketing wins over those doubts in some VC circles but you wonder if anyone at the early stage Magic Leap investors is getting asked tough questions about why they approved it, or if they've all just moved on to other roles.
What was it that experts said wasn't possible about Magic Leap? My understanding was that their product was a more advanced version of the tech in Microsoft's HaloLens and the primary challenges for both were bringing down the cost, expanding the FOV and DOF, and finding realistic use cases.
Microsoft went the enterprise route, like Google did with Lens, while Magic Leap tried to release something that felt boutique.