Finally, I am no great fan of MS (our household is MS-Free). However, I pride myself in recognizing tech potential -- regardless of the source.
There is definitely potential in HoloLens, more so than Google Glass and looks more exciting than Apple Watch (not that Apple Watch is a bad product). Another positive to come out of this, for MS, will be their ability to attract top talent, at least when it comes to wearables. Their cool factor just went up a few notches.
Maybe. I still think the promotional video that I have seen floating around gives a false impression.
The technology looks cool and might have some potential in the future, but what Microsoft has demonstrated is that it can do 3D CAD. That isn't too exciting for me or, I would expect, the average consumer. Plus, the hand gestures in the demo look extremely awkward.
I could be wrong, but I still think even in the best case, this will go the same way as Google Glass.
I just started watching the entire event videos ...
I have seen some short excerpt videos that are deceiving.
I think that the tech has much more potential than just using 3D CAD to build things.
Consider the Mars Rover application -- 3D spatial mapping and subsequent on-earth exploration of the mapped surfaces. They aren't building anything with this use of the tech. Though, I'm not sure how they do the mapping.
Apple has patents on similar capabilities.
Consider a similar app, without the goggles, where you're sitting front of your AppleTV Watching Downton Abbey ... Suddenly, you want to check if the back door is locked, the baby is OK, set the thermostat, etc.
You snap your fingers or say Hey Siri and AppleTV goes into interactive mode where you select what you want to interact with -- say a camera in the baby's room. A 3D image of the camera is displayed along with the view shown by the camera. You move your hands to reposition and refocus the camera, change the sound level and immediately see/hear the updated view/sound through the camera. Snap your fingers and you're viewing Downton Abby again.
Apple already has the tech to:
create the 3D images
3D map the various rooms in your house
interact with computers and iDevices with gestures and voice
monitor and control settings on Accessory devices -- thermostats, lights, cameras, locks ...
Sure, this is much less ambitious than building things with holograms -- but it is much more practical and sellable.
I just started watching the entire event videos ...
I have seen some short excerpt videos that are deceiving.
I think that the tech has much more potential than just using 3D CAD to build things.
Consider the Mars Rover application -- 3D spatial mapping and subsequent on-earth exploration of the mapped surfaces. They aren't building anything with this use of the tech. Though, I'm not sure how they do the mapping.
Apple has patents on similar capabilities.
Consider a similar app, without the goggles, where your sitting front of your AppleTV Watching Downton Abbey ... Suddenly, you want to check if the back door is locked, the baby is OK, set the thermostat, etc.
You snap your fingers or say Hey Siri and AppleTV goes into interactive mode where you select what you want to interact with -- say a camera in the baby's room. A 3D image of the camera is displayed along with the view shown by the camera. You move your hands to reposition and refocus the camera, change the sound level and immediately see/hear the updated view/sound through the camera. Snap your fingers and you're viewing Downton Abby again.
Apple already has the tech to:
create the 3D images
3D map the various rooms in your house
interact with computers and iDevices with gestures and voice
monitor and control settings on Accessory devices -- thermostats, lights, cameras, locks ...
Sure, this is much less ambitious than building things with holograms -- but it is much more practical and sellable.
Apple definitely has many patents in the area of 3D UI's and even headsets. Plus the fact, not too long ago, there were jobs postings on Apple's site for VR engineers. They know where things are headed. I also don't believe Angela and all the other fashion hires are on board just to sell watches. I actually think there are more Apple wearables coming.
There is definitely potential in HoloLens, more so than Google Glass and looks more exciting than Apple Watch (not that Apple Watch is a bad product). Another positive to come out of this, for MS, will be their ability to attract top talent, at least when it comes to wearables. Their cool factor just went up a few notches.
I agree! The biggest challenge for MS' CEO is to tear down the existing management fiefdoms and get everyone marching to the same goals ... or in the current context is it ghouls
Apple definitely has many patents in the area of 3D UI's and even headsets. Plus the fact, not too long ago, there were jobs postings on Apple's site for VR engineers. They know where things are headed. I also don't believe Angela and all the other fashion hires are on board just to sell watches. I actually think there are more Apple wearables coming.
Oh, yeah!
And, I suspect that when Apple can do it right they will make a self-contained headset that is no more intrusive than a normal pair of eyeglasses or sunglasses -- it will be an enhancement to these.
WOT: I just found out that Stevie Nicks and Jimmy Iovine dated way back when ...
Stevie Nicks was just the hottest thing with Fleetwood Mac -- here's my favorite song by them (tho not the original):
Maybe. I still think the promotional video that I have seen floating around gives a false impression.
The technology looks cool and might have some potential in the future, but what Microsoft has demonstrated is that it can do 3D CAD. That isn't too exciting for me or, I would expect, the average consumer. Plus, the hand gestures in the demo look extremely awkward.
This is really just another form of augmented reality. The PSP tried this with games a few years ago:
[VIDEO]
They used the PSP camera to capture the environment and they do tracking calculations to figure out how the PSP is moving and then integrate CGI into the frame. This makes games look as though they exist in your own environment.
One challenge is getting the tracking so accurate that the CGI elements never float about relative to the environment because that immediately breaks the illusion that they are integrated into the environment. Another challenge is representing the real environment realistically enough - using digital cameras to capture plus small displays to view is very limited (limited field of view and resolution).
I suspect Microsoft is using Kinect technology to do extremely accurate tracking, which means objects don't float around. Their visor would be transparent so there's no effort in depicting reality, they just let your eyes do the work. All that's left is to get the best way to display the CGI parts on top of the scene. To get CGI to show behind physical objects, they need to use a standard camera along with the depth sensor. Then they just show the composition on the glasses.
The main limitation I can see with this is that the display on the glasses will still be transparent so I expect that CGI elements will all be partially transparent too. That's why it will be similar in appearance to a hologram. This makes it difficult for certain kinds of work because you'd never get accurate colors. If they can figure out a way to turn portions of the display fully opaque so that you can't see the environment behind the CGI parts, that might work better but then the CGI elements wouldn't blend quite so well (lighting, resolution etc).
This will be quite a good way to do X-Ray type apps where you can superimpose nude bodies onto real people as they walk by because Kinect-type tracking will capture all the body accurately. The transparency still needs to be sorted though. The Kinect can do this kind of thing already:
[VIDEO]
You might be able to do this with the headset in the mirror if the depth tracking compensated for the reflections and the mirror properly reflected the infrared light.
I wonder where Microsoft gets their depth sensors now that Apple bought Primesense that made the sensors for the first Kinect. They must have another supplier but I haven't read what company it is.
An Oculus Rift setup with an added Kinect and high resolution camera would get around the transparency problem but it would feel like you were looking at the world through a camera.
All of these setups are pretty useless for webcam chats too because you have huge goggles on.
Microsoft demoed Minecraft on the HoloLens prototype. This could be a neat replacement for lego for kids where you can build anything. You can build your own race tracks and things with no tidying up. They'd need to work on the controls but you could have a wireless XBox controller hooked up to it for some of the interaction. A 3D mouse can just be a ball that you move in 3D and squeeze to click that relays its exact position and movement to the glasses. That gives you 1:1 rotational control too.
All of this technology is at a very experimental stage and while I think some form of augmented reality is the future of computing, none of these are it.
[QUOTE] [B][U][SIZE=4]Microsoft Invents 3D Manufacturing Platform[/SIZE][/U][/B]
Microsoft's invention generally relates to an operating system configured to enable arbitrary applications to output 3D models to be physically formed by arbitrary 3D manufacturing devices.
The operating system manages the 3D manufacturing devices, including installation of related software, device drivers, device properties, and so forth. The operating system also provides a path or application programming interface (API) through which the arbitrary applications pass arbitrary print jobs (or documents) of 3D models, in a standard format, to the 3D manufacturing devices. [/QUOTE]
I was at the MS kiosk at a mall near my house. They had the $229 HP laptop that was pretty nice for that price. They had a really nice Dell laptop (trackpad suckyish). The had some Slates. The Slate are nice and I do like the new Windows. It was Windows 8.1, but it's unique - otherwise you have Apple and Google and Blackberry having the same interface. And Win 8.1 i liquidly smooth. I look forward to Win 10 and may pick up a Win 10 laptop here soon, or one of those combo Acer laptop/tablets for a fraction of the cost of a Slate.
Anyhoo, the girl there was pretty excited about the hologram thing. She didn't say why, but said it would change our lives. She was genuinely excited and seem geekish.
She pulled up the MS video on the hologram thing. MS is on to something, but I don't know what it is. It was difficult to connect the dots as the video played.
I'm sure there will be hologram glasses that look like normal glasses in the future, but its not clear why Joe Sixpack needs holograms. It feels like MS thinks reality is not good enough? I scratch my head.
Anyway, Win 10 is a winner. It's pretty sweet. Google can keep pumping out Chromebooks (I'm typing this on a Chromebook).
I don't expect any real excitement coming out of Apple anymore. They are, as Steve J. said, becoming the Sony of the future. Nice, everyday devices. Refinements. Cheaper prices.
Ignoring the change that Satya Nadella has brought to Microsoft is stupid. Yes, Windows 8, Zune, Surface RT, and pretty much every product initiative under Ballmer was terrible. But this is not the Microsoft from 5 years ago. Nadella is listening to customers, pushing teams to come up with innovative ideas, and will probably herald a second golden age for Microsoft. Anyone that looks at Microsoft's recent failures, under Ballmer, as the sum of what the company is capable of is blind.
Hopefully fall is not too late for Win10. It might win on the desktop, but the tablet could end up very much a niche and the phone could be on life support.
Hopefully, they can pull it off. They are going to have a lot of back hoeing to do.
It will be interesting to know if you buy an app on Win10 PC that your license is extended to your phone.
At the MS kiosk/store at the mall, people were all asking about W10. Everyone wanted to avoid W8/8.1.
I was at the MS kiosk at a mall near my house. They had the $229 HP laptop that was pretty nice for that price. They had a really nice Dell laptop (trackpad suckyish). The had some Slates. The Slate are nice and I do like the new Windows. It was Windows 8.1, but it's unique - otherwise you have Apple and Google and Blackberry having the same interface. And Win 8.1 i liquidly smooth. I look forward to Win 10 and may pick up a Win 10 laptop here soon, or one of those combo Acer laptop/tablets for a fraction of the cost of a Slate.
Anyhoo, the girl there was pretty excited about the hologram thing. She didn't say why, but said it would change our lives. She was genuinely excited and seem geekish.
She pulled up the MS video on the hologram thing. MS is on to something, but I don't know what it is. It was difficult to connect the dots as the video played.
I'm sure there will be hologram glasses that look like normal glasses in the future, but its not clear why Joe Sixpack needs holograms. It feels like MS thinks reality is not good enough? I scratch my head.
Anyway, Win 10 is a winner. It's pretty sweet. Google can keep pumping out Chromebooks (I'm typing this on a Chromebook).
I don't expect any real excitement coming out of Apple anymore. They are, as Steve J. said, becoming the Sony of the future. Nice, everyday devices. Refinements. Cheaper prices.
Yes; I share the same resignation as you.
I love my Apple devices, and expect Apple will keep improving them. The iPod, iPhone and iPad were amazing starbursts of technology. I don't think we will see their like again for a long time.
I love my Apple devices, and expect Apple will keep improving them. The iPod, iPhone and iPad were amazing starbursts of technology. I don't think we will see their like again for a long time.
Apple is a bit of a one-hit wonder, like a lot of companies.
Apple is good at taking something we use and putting a chip and OS in it. They basically only make different computers in different form factors.]
We should see some amazing refinements down the road. Lighter, roll up or fold up phones, better cameras, etc.
The three features of Apple Watch are its fitness tracking, personal sketch/taptic/heartbeat communications and glance able notifications on a watch. These were detailed at length during the iPhone 6 event.
But those are not "compelling breakout functionalit[ies]".
The Zune HD was actually quite good, and received very positive reviews. But by that time Apple had already monopolized the market with the iPod Touch, so it didn't matter
I'm not gonna argue with you on the Slate. I think everyone can agree it was conclusively a flop
And the Surface 2 actual landed a 4.7 on Engadget, compared to the iPad Air's 4.6. Not a huge difference, but hey, it's there
In what way did Apple "monopolize" the MP3 market?
Did it stop retailers from selling Zunes? Did it lean record labels to get them to not license their music to Microsoft? Was there no software or videos capable of playing on Zunes because of Apple or anyone else? Microsoft suggested that customers would switch from iPods to Zunes, and the CNET/Wired/Engadget blogs all agreed that this was inevitable because of Microsoft's great Windows market power and its ability to orchestrate innovation between PC makers that outpaced Apple, etc.
Engadget gives Surface a good review? How surprising!
Sure, but they don't seem to me to have the mass appeal of the iOS devices, at least, not for the asking price.
To look at it another way: what devices will the Apple Watch be replacing? The iPhone and iPad replaced any number of devices that we previously owned. But very few people own any fitness tracking or health device, and the glance-able notifications are really just a slightly more convenient duplication of iPhone functionality. Even the watch has been replaced by the iPhone or mobile phone for most people. The feature that I like the sound of most is the taptic feedback for maps; it’s not enough to sway me, though. At any rate, Apple could introduce that technology to the iPhone.
My fear is that the failure of the Watch may harm Apple's reputation; it’s obviously going to have little effect on their finances in that event. May I be proved wrong!
I honestly think the watch will be marketed more as a fashion device than one with actual utility. It's definitely not made for techies, in my opinion. I know I certainly won't buy one.
The killer feature of Apple Watch, or any smart watch is convenience so that you don't always have the hassle of pulling out your smartphone.
How in the world is glancing at your phone an inconvenience? When I receive a notification, I want to check twitter and log into clash of clans in the mean time.
In what way did Apple "monopolize" the MP3 market?
Did it stop retailers from selling Zunes? Did it lean record labels to get them to not license their music to Microsoft? Was there no software or videos capable of playing on Zunes because of Apple or anyone else? Microsoft suggested that customers would switch from iPods to Zunes, and the CNET/Wired/Engadget blogs all agreed that this was inevitable because of Microsoft's great Windows market power and its ability to orchestrate innovation between PC makers that outpaced Apple, etc.
Perhaps "monopolize" is the wrong term to use, but one can't deny that by the time the Zune came into play everyone was already hooked on the iPods, and seeing Zunes as lesser "me-too" devices therefore had no compulsion to switch, despite what analysts may have predicted.
My point is that Microsoft's products are not always inferior, but they are invariably late to the game
Quote:
Engadget gives Surface a good review? How surprising!
Yes, a 9.3/10 (if I failed to mention that previously)
Looks like those are real holograms, at least this is not stereoscopic 3D:
http://www.wired.com/2015/01/microsoft-nadella/ >>> Project HoloLens is built, fittingly enough, around a set of holographic lenses. Each lens has three layers of glass—in blue, green, and red—full of microthin corrugated grooves that diffract light. ... A “light engine” above the lenses projects light into the glasses, where it hits the grating and then volleys between the layers of glass millions of times. That process, along with input from the device's myriad sensors, tricks the eye into perceiving the image as existing in the world beyond the lenses.
How in the world is glancing at your phone an inconvenience? When I receive a notification, I want to check twitter and log into clash of clans in the mean time.
It isn't the glancing. It's the constantly having to take it out of your pocket (or purse if you're a woman) that's annoying.
The reaction by Arstechnica is the same reaction I've seen on every tech blog that's tested it. magical / mind blowing. I don't think they can all be wrong. It's the same reaction the iPhone got when it was introduced January 2007.
Project HoloLens is built, fittingly enough, around a set of holographic lenses. Each lens has three layers of glass—in blue, green, and red—full of microthin corrugated grooves that diffract light. ... A “light engine” above the lenses projects light into the glasses, where it hits the grating and then volleys between the layers of glass millions of times. That process, along with input from the device's myriad sensors, tricks the eye into perceiving the image as existing in the world beyond the lenses.
Nothing in Wired's report indicates use of actual holography, certainly not the use of diffraction gratings. The author states that ...light bounces around millions of times in the so-called light engine. This is journalist speak for "I have no idea what is happening." The author also states that The device is more powerful than a laptop... but doesn't question the astounding implications of the claim. The report is full of these completely unchallenged statements which in the past, would have seen a device labelled vapourware.
Comments
When the product you are demonstrating uses, nay depends on CGI -- how do you propose making videos of the product without using CGI?
Actually, in the video (posted earlier) which demonstrates building the quadcopter, they showed both:
You could see the CGI component being applied, hanging in space between the designer and the product being assembled.
No mean accomplishment this!
As for the detractors, the HoloLens tech appears to satisfy at least one definition of holography:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holography
Finally, I am no great fan of MS (our household is MS-Free). However, I pride myself in recognizing tech potential -- regardless of the source.
There is definitely potential in HoloLens, more so than Google Glass and looks more exciting than Apple Watch (not that Apple Watch is a bad product). Another positive to come out of this, for MS, will be their ability to attract top talent, at least when it comes to wearables. Their cool factor just went up a few notches.
I just started watching the entire event videos ...
I have seen some short excerpt videos that are deceiving.
I think that the tech has much more potential than just using 3D CAD to build things.
Consider the Mars Rover application -- 3D spatial mapping and subsequent on-earth exploration of the mapped surfaces. They aren't building anything with this use of the tech. Though, I'm not sure how they do the mapping.
Apple has patents on similar capabilities.
Consider a similar app, without the goggles, where you're sitting front of your AppleTV Watching Downton Abbey ... Suddenly, you want to check if the back door is locked, the baby is OK, set the thermostat, etc.
You snap your fingers or say Hey Siri and AppleTV goes into interactive mode where you select what you want to interact with -- say a camera in the baby's room. A 3D image of the camera is displayed along with the view shown by the camera. You move your hands to reposition and refocus the camera, change the sound level and immediately see/hear the updated view/sound through the camera. Snap your fingers and you're viewing Downton Abby again.
Apple already has the tech to:
Sure, this is much less ambitious than building things with holograms -- but it is much more practical and sellable.
I just started watching the entire event videos ...
I have seen some short excerpt videos that are deceiving.
I think that the tech has much more potential than just using 3D CAD to build things.
Consider the Mars Rover application -- 3D spatial mapping and subsequent on-earth exploration of the mapped surfaces. They aren't building anything with this use of the tech. Though, I'm not sure how they do the mapping.
Apple has patents on similar capabilities.
Consider a similar app, without the goggles, where your sitting front of your AppleTV Watching Downton Abbey ... Suddenly, you want to check if the back door is locked, the baby is OK, set the thermostat, etc.
You snap your fingers or say Hey Siri and AppleTV goes into interactive mode where you select what you want to interact with -- say a camera in the baby's room. A 3D image of the camera is displayed along with the view shown by the camera. You move your hands to reposition and refocus the camera, change the sound level and immediately see/hear the updated view/sound through the camera. Snap your fingers and you're viewing Downton Abby again.
Apple already has the tech to:
Sure, this is much less ambitious than building things with holograms -- but it is much more practical and sellable.
Apple definitely has many patents in the area of 3D UI's and even headsets. Plus the fact, not too long ago, there were jobs postings on Apple's site for VR engineers. They know where things are headed. I also don't believe Angela and all the other fashion hires are on board just to sell watches. I actually think there are more Apple wearables coming.
I agree! The biggest challenge for MS' CEO is to tear down the existing management fiefdoms and get everyone marching to the same goals ... or in the current context is it ghouls
Oh, yeah!
And, I suspect that when Apple can do it right they will make a self-contained headset that is no more intrusive than a normal pair of eyeglasses or sunglasses -- it will be an enhancement to these.
WOT: I just found out that Stevie Nicks and Jimmy Iovine dated way back when ...
Stevie Nicks was just the hottest thing with Fleetwood Mac -- here's my favorite song by them (tho not the original):
[VIDEO]
This is really just another form of augmented reality. The PSP tried this with games a few years ago:
[VIDEO]
They used the PSP camera to capture the environment and they do tracking calculations to figure out how the PSP is moving and then integrate CGI into the frame. This makes games look as though they exist in your own environment.
One challenge is getting the tracking so accurate that the CGI elements never float about relative to the environment because that immediately breaks the illusion that they are integrated into the environment. Another challenge is representing the real environment realistically enough - using digital cameras to capture plus small displays to view is very limited (limited field of view and resolution).
I suspect Microsoft is using Kinect technology to do extremely accurate tracking, which means objects don't float around. Their visor would be transparent so there's no effort in depicting reality, they just let your eyes do the work. All that's left is to get the best way to display the CGI parts on top of the scene. To get CGI to show behind physical objects, they need to use a standard camera along with the depth sensor. Then they just show the composition on the glasses.
The main limitation I can see with this is that the display on the glasses will still be transparent so I expect that CGI elements will all be partially transparent too. That's why it will be similar in appearance to a hologram. This makes it difficult for certain kinds of work because you'd never get accurate colors. If they can figure out a way to turn portions of the display fully opaque so that you can't see the environment behind the CGI parts, that might work better but then the CGI elements wouldn't blend quite so well (lighting, resolution etc).
This will be quite a good way to do X-Ray type apps where you can superimpose nude bodies onto real people as they walk by because Kinect-type tracking will capture all the body accurately. The transparency still needs to be sorted though. The Kinect can do this kind of thing already:
[VIDEO]
You might be able to do this with the headset in the mirror if the depth tracking compensated for the reflections and the mirror properly reflected the infrared light.
I wonder where Microsoft gets their depth sensors now that Apple bought Primesense that made the sensors for the first Kinect. They must have another supplier but I haven't read what company it is.
An Oculus Rift setup with an added Kinect and high resolution camera would get around the transparency problem but it would feel like you were looking at the world through a camera.
All of these setups are pretty useless for webcam chats too because you have huge goggles on.
Microsoft demoed Minecraft on the HoloLens prototype. This could be a neat replacement for lego for kids where you can build anything. You can build your own race tracks and things with no tidying up. They'd need to work on the controls but you could have a wireless XBox controller hooked up to it for some of the interaction. A 3D mouse can just be a ball that you move in 3D and squeeze to click that relays its exact position and movement to the glasses. That gives you 1:1 rotational control too.
All of this technology is at a very experimental stage and while I think some form of augmented reality is the future of computing, none of these are it.
Here's an interesting read from Patently Apple:
[QUOTE]
[B][U][SIZE=4]Microsoft Invents 3D Manufacturing Platform[/SIZE][/U][/B]
Microsoft's invention generally relates to an operating system configured to enable arbitrary applications to output 3D models to be physically formed by arbitrary 3D manufacturing devices.
The operating system manages the 3D manufacturing devices, including installation of related software, device drivers, device properties, and so forth. The operating system also provides a path or application programming interface (API) through which the arbitrary applications pass arbitrary print jobs (or documents) of 3D models, in a standard format, to the 3D manufacturing devices.
[/QUOTE]
http://www.patentlymobile.com/2015/01/microsoft-preparing-a-3d-manufacturing-platform.html
It's not VR. It's AR. Slight distinction
And they did announce a headset? I'm confused
I was at the MS kiosk at a mall near my house. They had the $229 HP laptop that was pretty nice for that price. They had a really nice Dell laptop (trackpad suckyish). The had some Slates. The Slate are nice and I do like the new Windows. It was Windows 8.1, but it's unique - otherwise you have Apple and Google and Blackberry having the same interface. And Win 8.1 i liquidly smooth. I look forward to Win 10 and may pick up a Win 10 laptop here soon, or one of those combo Acer laptop/tablets for a fraction of the cost of a Slate.
Anyhoo, the girl there was pretty excited about the hologram thing. She didn't say why, but said it would change our lives. She was genuinely excited and seem geekish.
She pulled up the MS video on the hologram thing. MS is on to something, but I don't know what it is. It was difficult to connect the dots as the video played.
I'm sure there will be hologram glasses that look like normal glasses in the future, but its not clear why Joe Sixpack needs holograms. It feels like MS thinks reality is not good enough? I scratch my head.
Anyway, Win 10 is a winner. It's pretty sweet. Google can keep pumping out Chromebooks (I'm typing this on a Chromebook).
I don't expect any real excitement coming out of Apple anymore. They are, as Steve J. said, becoming the Sony of the future. Nice, everyday devices. Refinements. Cheaper prices.
Ignoring the change that Satya Nadella has brought to Microsoft is stupid. Yes, Windows 8, Zune, Surface RT, and pretty much every product initiative under Ballmer was terrible. But this is not the Microsoft from 5 years ago. Nadella is listening to customers, pushing teams to come up with innovative ideas, and will probably herald a second golden age for Microsoft. Anyone that looks at Microsoft's recent failures, under Ballmer, as the sum of what the company is capable of is blind.
Hopefully fall is not too late for Win10. It might win on the desktop, but the tablet could end up very much a niche and the phone could be on life support.
Hopefully, they can pull it off. They are going to have a lot of back hoeing to do.
It will be interesting to know if you buy an app on Win10 PC that your license is extended to your phone.
At the MS kiosk/store at the mall, people were all asking about W10. Everyone wanted to avoid W8/8.1.
It's not VR. It's AR. Slight distinction
And they did announce a headset? I'm confused
I was at the MS kiosk at a mall near my house. They had the $229 HP laptop that was pretty nice for that price. They had a really nice Dell laptop (trackpad suckyish). The had some Slates. The Slate are nice and I do like the new Windows. It was Windows 8.1, but it's unique - otherwise you have Apple and Google and Blackberry having the same interface. And Win 8.1 i liquidly smooth. I look forward to Win 10 and may pick up a Win 10 laptop here soon, or one of those combo Acer laptop/tablets for a fraction of the cost of a Slate.
Anyhoo, the girl there was pretty excited about the hologram thing. She didn't say why, but said it would change our lives. She was genuinely excited and seem geekish.
She pulled up the MS video on the hologram thing. MS is on to something, but I don't know what it is. It was difficult to connect the dots as the video played.
I'm sure there will be hologram glasses that look like normal glasses in the future, but its not clear why Joe Sixpack needs holograms. It feels like MS thinks reality is not good enough? I scratch my head.
Anyway, Win 10 is a winner. It's pretty sweet. Google can keep pumping out Chromebooks (I'm typing this on a Chromebook).
I don't expect any real excitement coming out of Apple anymore. They are, as Steve J. said, becoming the Sony of the future. Nice, everyday devices. Refinements. Cheaper prices.
Yes; I share the same resignation as you.
I love my Apple devices, and expect Apple will keep improving them. The iPod, iPhone and iPad were amazing starbursts of technology. I don't think we will see their like again for a long time.
Yes; I share the same resignation as you.
I love my Apple devices, and expect Apple will keep improving them. The iPod, iPhone and iPad were amazing starbursts of technology. I don't think we will see their like again for a long time.
Apple is a bit of a one-hit wonder, like a lot of companies.
Apple is good at taking something we use and putting a chip and OS in it. They basically only make different computers in different form factors.]
We should see some amazing refinements down the road. Lighter, roll up or fold up phones, better cameras, etc.
The three features of Apple Watch are its fitness tracking, personal sketch/taptic/heartbeat communications and glance able notifications on a watch. These were detailed at length during the iPhone 6 event.
But those are not "compelling breakout functionalit[ies]".
The Zune HD was actually quite good, and received very positive reviews. But by that time Apple had already monopolized the market with the iPod Touch, so it didn't matter
I'm not gonna argue with you on the Slate. I think everyone can agree it was conclusively a flop
And the Surface 2 actual landed a 4.7 on Engadget, compared to the iPad Air's 4.6. Not a huge difference, but hey, it's there
In what way did Apple "monopolize" the MP3 market?
Did it stop retailers from selling Zunes? Did it lean record labels to get them to not license their music to Microsoft? Was there no software or videos capable of playing on Zunes because of Apple or anyone else? Microsoft suggested that customers would switch from iPods to Zunes, and the CNET/Wired/Engadget blogs all agreed that this was inevitable because of Microsoft's great Windows market power and its ability to orchestrate innovation between PC makers that outpaced Apple, etc.
Engadget gives Surface a good review? How surprising!
Sure, but they don't seem to me to have the mass appeal of the iOS devices, at least, not for the asking price.
To look at it another way: what devices will the Apple Watch be replacing? The iPhone and iPad replaced any number of devices that we previously owned. But very few people own any fitness tracking or health device, and the glance-able notifications are really just a slightly more convenient duplication of iPhone functionality. Even the watch has been replaced by the iPhone or mobile phone for most people. The feature that I like the sound of most is the taptic feedback for maps; it’s not enough to sway me, though. At any rate, Apple could introduce that technology to the iPhone.
My fear is that the failure of the Watch may harm Apple's reputation; it’s obviously going to have little effect on their finances in that event. May I be proved wrong!
I honestly think the watch will be marketed more as a fashion device than one with actual utility. It's definitely not made for techies, in my opinion. I know I certainly won't buy one.
The killer feature of Apple Watch, or any smart watch is convenience so that you don't always have the hassle of pulling out your smartphone.
How in the world is glancing at your phone an inconvenience? When I receive a notification, I want to check twitter and log into clash of clans in the mean time.
In what way did Apple "monopolize" the MP3 market?
Did it stop retailers from selling Zunes? Did it lean record labels to get them to not license their music to Microsoft? Was there no software or videos capable of playing on Zunes because of Apple or anyone else? Microsoft suggested that customers would switch from iPods to Zunes, and the CNET/Wired/Engadget blogs all agreed that this was inevitable because of Microsoft's great Windows market power and its ability to orchestrate innovation between PC makers that outpaced Apple, etc.
Perhaps "monopolize" is the wrong term to use, but one can't deny that by the time the Zune came into play everyone was already hooked on the iPods, and seeing Zunes as lesser "me-too" devices therefore had no compulsion to switch, despite what analysts may have predicted.
My point is that Microsoft's products are not always inferior, but they are invariably late to the game
Yes, a 9.3/10 (if I failed to mention that previously)
http://www.wired.com/2015/01/microsoft-nadella/
>>>
Project HoloLens is built, fittingly enough, around a set of holographic lenses. Each lens has three layers of glass—in blue, green, and red—full of microthin corrugated grooves that diffract light. ... A “light engine” above the lenses projects light into the glasses, where it hits the grating and then volleys between the layers of glass millions of times. That process, along with input from the device's myriad sensors, tricks the eye into perceiving the image as existing in the world beyond the lenses.
How in the world is glancing at your phone an inconvenience? When I receive a notification, I want to check twitter and log into clash of clans in the mean time.
It isn't the glancing. It's the constantly having to take it out of your pocket (or purse if you're a woman) that's annoying.
Someone begs to differ
The reaction by Arstechnica is the same reaction I've seen on every tech blog that's tested it. magical / mind blowing. I don't think they can all be wrong. It's the same reaction the iPhone got when it was introduced January 2007.
Looks like those are real holograms, at least this is not stereoscopic 3D:
http://www.wired.com/2015/01/microsoft-nadella/
>>>
Project HoloLens is built, fittingly enough, around a set of holographic lenses. Each lens has three layers of glass—in blue, green, and red—full of microthin corrugated grooves that diffract light. ... A “light engine” above the lenses projects light into the glasses, where it hits the grating and then volleys between the layers of glass millions of times. That process, along with input from the device's myriad sensors, tricks the eye into perceiving the image as existing in the world beyond the lenses.
Nothing in Wired's report indicates use of actual holography, certainly not the use of diffraction gratings. The author states that ...light bounces around millions of times in the so-called light engine. This is journalist speak for "I have no idea what is happening." The author also states that The device is more powerful than a laptop... but doesn't question the astounding implications of the claim. The report is full of these completely unchallenged statements which in the past, would have seen a device labelled vapourware.