zlacker

[parent] [thread] 5 comments
1. jayd16+(OP)[view] [source] 2019-12-06 20:29:14
This is way overblown. They have at least a Hololens equivalent, and if you value occlusion, they're ahead. And that's without Microsoft's reach. Equating them to vaporware isn't fair at all.
replies(2): >>pvaran+J >>whoisj+f1
◧
2. pvaran+J[view] [source] 2019-12-06 20:33:22
>>jayd16+(OP)
Have you used one?
replies(1): >>jayd16+J9
◧
3. whoisj+f1[view] [source] 2019-12-06 20:36:49
>>jayd16+(OP)
Also, from the reviews that I have read their software seems to be pretty good, at least when it comes to spatial awareness and surface detection.

Most reviews are positive but main problem seems to be the price and the fact that the overall end-to-end experience still feels pretty rough.

◧◩
4. jayd16+J9[view] [source] [discussion] 2019-12-06 21:44:36
>>pvaran+J
Both.
replies(1): >>pvaran+xo
◧◩◪
5. pvaran+xo[view] [source] [discussion] 2019-12-06 23:35:58
>>jayd16+J9
I can't see how you would really take their implementation of occlusion seriously, what's it useful for? it's so laggy that it's not even tech-demo worthy.
replies(1): >>jayd16+Fr
◧◩◪◨
6. jayd16+Fr[view] [source] [discussion] 2019-12-07 00:05:22
>>pvaran+xo
It seemed fine for static object geometry. Throw a virtual ball behind a couch and its gone. AR toys can fall behind tables. It does add to the experience. I don't have the most up to date view but has the Hololens significantly improved over that?
[go to top]