zlacker

I have tried the leap in practice and the experience was significantly above what I expected. The tracking worked most of the time (how???), with occasional wonkyness. The accuracy was very good (outside of the wonks). Where it is very limited is number of applications.

>>krageo+(OP)
What can one say? I also tried it (have always been fan of new interaction methods) and was severely disappointed. Even the "put reflective stickers on your fingers and use an off-the-shelf wiimote" had better tracking, though it is obviously less convenient.

That said, I am waiting for v2 from these guys and/or anyone else.

>>Ashame+F
Edit: Oops replied to the wrong comment.

>>IshKeb+r3
They were talking about fingers and we're talking about leap. It's about hands :)

>>krageo+(OP)
The problem, to me, looks like getting 90% of the way there is possible. However, getting from 90% to 99.9% (to get rid of that "wonkyness"), seems to be way way way harder. Magic Leap has made little to no progress in working out the kinks in their product despite raising literally billions of dollars.

>>krageo+P3
I think you’re talking about Leap Motion, not Magic Leap. I made the same mistake until I dug into the article.

>>krageo+(OP)
You mean the headset position tracking? That already worked very reliable on the Hololens years ago, and it works almost as well on the Quest, which is far far cheaper. It was a solved technology before the Magic Leap launched. Or did you mean some other kind of tracking?

>>cmeach+k4
I wrote a camera/IMU tracking software (VIO) before. I can confirm this statement. Get it working is difficult and requires getting all the algos right. Getting it work reliably is a lot of rigorous testing, collecting datasets, evaluating slightest changes, tuning numerical stability, experimenting with different techniques which might work better in low light and optimizing for the hardware (VIO is intensive but the best VIO is useless if there is no computation power left for the app itself).

Neither of this is required for a slick demo in well lit room and perhaps on better HW.

>>cmeach+k4
The 90% statement is both true and is one of the things that really sucks people in. There are any number of technologies that kinda/sorta work as a PoC. There's a gaping chasm between that PoC and a viable working product but a lot of people look at the PoC and can imagine what the working product looks like--and think to themselves that it's only about some refinement.