Okay, I've read Wired's piece on this and two interesting bits of information come out:
[1] The device has a CPU, GPU and an HPU, a 'holographic processing unit'. It also has a 'depth processing camera'. Looking good, if a little hard to believe, for holography.
[2] The device has 'two lenses'. I have no idea what this means but alarm bells are ringing. (The author didn't pursue details.) If the lenses are in fact, translucent/transparent screens onto which separate left-eye/right-eye information is projected, then game over, this is not a holographic display. In holography, a single interference pattern is viewed by each eye which, from slightly different perspectives, create in our brains the illusion of a 3D image. Two separate screens are not needed, the interference pattern is contained on a single surface.
I would be astounded if Microsoft is claiming holographic imaging if they are performing glorified (or unglorified) stereoscopic imaging. If so, they will get hammered (not that the public would care).
So, what would a real holograph display look like? Well, it would comprise a single surface or screen and until properly illuminated, look like nothing sensible. This is because an interference pattern would be displayed that just looks like weird patterns. Once properly illuminated a 3D image would appear that would look that way with both eyes looking at the same screen. As one moves from side-to-side or up and down, the image, in 3 dimensions, would spin around or tilt. One could look behind an object in the scene for example, if enough information is presented.
Can't say that this headset is not a holographic one but evidence suggests not.
EDIT: Of course, the two screens could be showing slightly altered interference patterns to allow for parallax of the human eye but the computational overhead would be double that of a single display. However, two screens don't rule out holography in this case as I earlier stated.
Apparently, some of the journalists invited to try out the HoloLens in a hands-on demo have reported seeing some kind of a grated screen in the device. Therefore, it may very well be using interference patterns to create real holographic images. The computational overhead is probably the reason why this device has a new kind of GPU which Microsoft calls a HPU (Holographic Processing Unit).
And yes, you can spin around and look at a 3D object from all angles.
Apparently, some of the journalists invited to try out the HoloLens in a hands-on demo have reported seeing some kind of a grated screen in the device. Therefore, it may very well be using interference patterns to create real holographic images. The computational overhead is probably the reason why this device has a new kind of GPU which Microsoft calls a HPU (Holographic Processing Unit).
And yes, you can spin around and look at a 3D object from all angles.
Are you referring to the capability of this device or holography in general?
My goodness. Gone are the jokes centered around Microsoft's lack of vision...only to be replaced by a VERY special brand of vitriol in readers here today. Using that as a gauge, it would appear that our friends in Redmond hit a massive home run.
Seriously...I would hope that most of us agree that it's good to see such a major player with so much incredible talent finally wake up and prove to the world that it's still capable of some pretty nice work. The interactive feedback from the demo has been positive to ultra-positive so I doubt that you can write this up as vaporware. In fact, MS had what most would call a damn fine news day. It's about time.
Competition is always a great motivator, eh?
Now...let's see if/when they deliver.
Brick, I wouldn't come to an Apple forum and expect reassuring compliments for a Microsoft product. It's not gonna happen. Appreciate the optimism, though.
My thoughts on the product? I'll wait to share until it's actually shipped.
Brick, I wouldn't come to an Apple forum and expect reassuring compliments for a Microsoft product. It's not gonna happen. Appreciate the optimism, though.
My thoughts on the product? I'll wait to share until it's actually shipped.
I think we all instinctively understand that until VR or augmented reality systems are as light and easy to wear as a pair of sunglasses (and no, Google Glass ain't cutting it), this stuff will remain niche.
With how many features it infected Windows 10 with, you'd think the opposite would be the case but no.
Chalk up another one for the "Microsoft cares about PC gamers" column, 10 years of promises and I'm still waiting on a single one to be delivered on. Directx12 doesn't count as caring, it barely counts as acknowledging existence.
So... they're stuffing a Kinekt and a computer powerful enough to render 3d in the size of a headband, it does not require a cable and has it's own screen.
For the holograms to look realistic and not drive our perception crazy to the level of throwing the glasses out of the window, it's needed that they get properly *perfectly occluded by other objects - i.e. I am playing minecraft on my table, my cat (I actually don't have one) jumps in front of me. The Minecraft world should be occluded by the cat, and it should be rendered always behind my hands, unless I fit them inside the shapes...
This means that the Kinekt should do a high resolution scanning of the whole environment at a minimum of 60 fps (120 is optimal for the eyes, 60 is ok, 30 is on the edge, 20-25 is stop motion, under it gets difficult to perceive the frames as movement), the computer should take the tracking, deduce my movements and position, understand the occlusions, render the 3d model, mask the occluded areas, display the result on my lenses, in time for me not to notice any framerate difference between reality and the "hologram" (Christ, it's not an hologram).
And Microsoft, who could not make X1 run properly with the Kinekt, now, magically, can stuff all this power in a pair of glasses?
Another move to bring medias attention, to distract from the lack of direction.
I think we all instinctively understand that until VR or augmented reality systems are as light and easy to wear as a pair of sunglasses (and no, Google Glass ain't cutting it), this stuff will remain niche.
It's even worse than what I was originally thinking, this product really is vaporware! The form factor they keep showing is not some working prototype:
But everyone, including the article author, is still getting Microsoft the benefit of the doubt… It's kind of funny. i'm sure Apple could bring out there Prototypes and secret products to get a few applause, but what happens when your reputation begins to erode? Right now, you're seeing what happens when a company like Apple is consistent, their revenue goes through the roof, and they have a huge and loyal fan base!
I know this is an Apple website but I credited people with having a little more objectivity and less fanboism.
Over at Arstechnica they have had a hands on with the dev kit, and they describe it as magical. I remember Steve Jobs touting the iPad using such words. The comments are overwhelmingly positive too.
Wow, It's remarkable how "Hololens" gets all the press and Windows 10 gets none.
It doesn't matter, because HoloLens is a standalone Windows 10 device in its own right. The head-set is kind of like a self-contained PC, and the HoloLens software is developed using Windows 10 APIs.
I know this is an Apple website but I credited people with having a little more objectivity and less fanboism.
Over at Arstechnica they have had a hands on with the dev kit, and they describe it as magical. I remember Steve Jobs touting the iPad using such words. The comments are overwhelmingly positive too.
Personally I think this has a lot of potential, and if executed well could really transform the way we interact with tech and each other.
In technology, "potential" is a code word for "there is no audience for this product and we don't know how to sell it." You know what also had "potential"? The Segway.
In technology, "potential" is a code word for "there is no audience for this product and we don't know how to sell it." You know what also had "potential"? The Segway.
There already IS an audience for this product - NASA. And this is just the beginning.
It might look weird as a standalone pair of glasses, but imagine these being build into a helmet ... It certainly is going to save lives, both on the motorway, and the battlefield!
Augmented Reality is the way to go for glasses. Microsoft did nail that one.
The video Microsoft showed is based on how AR might look like in the future. The glasses were already reviewed by other sites like Engadget and Microsoft's video doesn't even marginally reflect the quality and features presented:
1- The imagery are projected on a little rectangular screen behind the deceptive curved front, meaning there is no immersive experience.
2- The projected images are translucent and do not cast shadows, opposite of what their video showed.
All in all the headset is like any other AR headset, as one article concludes "HoloLens is clearly very early, and kinda sucks right now."
This is a typical Microsoft they over promise, to create a frenzy, then the under deliver.
Unbelievable. This has all the hallmarks of a legacy Ballmer project that intended to capitalize on the false perception that GOOGLE GLASS was going to be a game changer, and indicative of the Ballmer era that sunk Microsoft: Playing catch-up with inferior products.
I don't think to many people thought Google Glass was a Game Changer. It's nothing more then a HUD running Android. (Heads Up Display). They've been around for a long time in a number of forms. Hell you play games with a HUD on screen. Do a Google search and find all different types of HUD's. This thing from MS is interesting, but again, I don't see much use for it but in a commercial Environment. MS game zero release dat, just sometime in the lifespan of Windows 10 it'll get released. So that's in a year, or 8 years from now. Of course there's no price for it either. So MS just threw out a Hail Mary. By the time MS throws it out into the market, it could look completely different. and suck all that much more to keep the price down where people will buy it. People sure won't buy it at $1500.
In technology, "potential" is a code word for "there is no audience for this product and we don't know how to sell it." You know what also had "potential"? The Segway.
I have my doubts too, but...
Some years ago I remember seeing a system that used a couple of microphones and some DSP to analyse the shock wave from high speed projectiles in flight to compute their originating point.
I can imagine a networked squad with each member having a microphone and wearing something like these that would superimpose on their view virtual projectile traces in the air and locator marks for the source/s, even from behind cover.
Could be useful.
It would be a runaway success if IKEA included a QR code on their flatpacks so that you had a VR assembly instruction and guide in sight.
Cooking recipes and guides. DIY surgery... hmmmm....
Comments
When will this HoloLens going to launch. I want to buy this .
Okay, I've read Wired's piece on this and two interesting bits of information come out:
[1] The device has a CPU, GPU and an HPU, a 'holographic processing unit'. It also has a 'depth processing camera'. Looking good, if a little hard to believe, for holography.
[2] The device has 'two lenses'. I have no idea what this means but alarm bells are ringing. (The author didn't pursue details.) If the lenses are in fact, translucent/transparent screens onto which separate left-eye/right-eye information is projected, then game over, this is not a holographic display. In holography, a single interference pattern is viewed by each eye which, from slightly different perspectives, create in our brains the illusion of a 3D image. Two separate screens are not needed, the interference pattern is contained on a single surface.
I would be astounded if Microsoft is claiming holographic imaging if they are performing glorified (or unglorified) stereoscopic imaging. If so, they will get hammered (not that the public would care).
http://www.wired.com/2015/01/microsoft-hands-on/
So, what would a real holograph display look like? Well, it would comprise a single surface or screen and until properly illuminated, look like nothing sensible. This is because an interference pattern would be displayed that just looks like weird patterns. Once properly illuminated a 3D image would appear that would look that way with both eyes looking at the same screen. As one moves from side-to-side or up and down, the image, in 3 dimensions, would spin around or tilt. One could look behind an object in the scene for example, if enough information is presented.
Can't say that this headset is not a holographic one but evidence suggests not.
EDIT: Of course, the two screens could be showing slightly altered interference patterns to allow for parallax of the human eye but the computational overhead would be double that of a single display. However, two screens don't rule out holography in this case as I earlier stated.
Apparently, some of the journalists invited to try out the HoloLens in a hands-on demo have reported seeing some kind of a grated screen in the device. Therefore, it may very well be using interference patterns to create real holographic images. The computational overhead is probably the reason why this device has a new kind of GPU which Microsoft calls a HPU (Holographic Processing Unit).
And yes, you can spin around and look at a 3D object from all angles.
Apparently, some of the journalists invited to try out the HoloLens in a hands-on demo have reported seeing some kind of a grated screen in the device. Therefore, it may very well be using interference patterns to create real holographic images. The computational overhead is probably the reason why this device has a new kind of GPU which Microsoft calls a HPU (Holographic Processing Unit).
And yes, you can spin around and look at a 3D object from all angles.
Are you referring to the capability of this device or holography in general?
Are you referring to the capability of this device or holography in general?
This device.
Brick, I wouldn't come to an Apple forum and expect reassuring compliments for a Microsoft product. It's not gonna happen. Appreciate the optimism, though.
My thoughts on the product? I'll wait to share until it's actually shipped.
I think we all instinctively understand that until VR or augmented reality systems are as light and easy to wear as a pair of sunglasses (and no, Google Glass ain't cutting it), this stuff will remain niche.
The Xbox is still not a big moneymaker for them.
With how many features it infected Windows 10 with, you'd think the opposite would be the case but no.
Chalk up another one for the "Microsoft cares about PC gamers" column, 10 years of promises and I'm still waiting on a single one to be delivered on. Directx12 doesn't count as caring, it barely counts as acknowledging existence.
For the holograms to look realistic and not drive our perception crazy to the level of throwing the glasses out of the window, it's needed that they get properly *perfectly occluded by other objects - i.e. I am playing minecraft on my table, my cat (I actually don't have one) jumps in front of me. The Minecraft world should be occluded by the cat, and it should be rendered always behind my hands, unless I fit them inside the shapes...
This means that the Kinekt should do a high resolution scanning of the whole environment at a minimum of 60 fps (120 is optimal for the eyes, 60 is ok, 30 is on the edge, 20-25 is stop motion, under it gets difficult to perceive the frames as movement), the computer should take the tracking, deduce my movements and position, understand the occlusions, render the 3d model, mask the occluded areas, display the result on my lenses, in time for me not to notice any framerate difference between reality and the "hologram" (Christ, it's not an hologram).
And Microsoft, who could not make X1 run properly with the Kinekt, now, magically, can stuff all this power in a pair of glasses?
Another move to bring medias attention, to distract from the lack of direction.
It's even worse than what I was originally thinking, this product really is vaporware! The form factor they keep showing is not some working prototype:
http://www.engadget.com/2015/01/21/microsoft-hololens-hands-on/
But everyone, including the article author, is still getting Microsoft the benefit of the doubt… It's kind of funny. i'm sure Apple could bring out there Prototypes and secret products to get a few applause, but what happens when your reputation begins to erode? Right now, you're seeing what happens when a company like Apple is consistent, their revenue goes through the roof, and they have a huge and loyal fan base!
Wow... so much negativity.
I know this is an Apple website but I credited people with having a little more objectivity and less fanboism.
Over at Arstechnica they have had a hands on with the dev kit, and they describe it as magical. I remember Steve Jobs touting the iPad using such words. The comments are overwhelmingly positive too.
Take a read .. http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/01/hands-on-with-hololens-making-the-virtual-real/?comments=1
Personally I think this has a lot of potential, and if executed well could really transform the way we interact with tech and each other.
This kinda looks like google glass to me. Too early to tell, but I just don't see this whole "augmented reality" thing take off.
Wow, It's remarkable how "Hololens" gets all the press and Windows 10 gets none.
It doesn't matter, because HoloLens is a standalone Windows 10 device in its own right. The head-set is kind of like a self-contained PC, and the HoloLens software is developed using Windows 10 APIs.
In technology, "potential" is a code word for "there is no audience for this product and we don't know how to sell it." You know what also had "potential"? The Segway.
In technology, "potential" is a code word for "there is no audience for this product and we don't know how to sell it." You know what also had "potential"? The Segway.
There already IS an audience for this product - NASA. And this is just the beginning.
It's nice that you are a believer. I prefer to be realistic.
It's nice that you are a believer. I prefer to be realistic.
I don't need to believe. I saw the demo, one of which was presented by Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) working on the Mars Rover.
It might look weird as a standalone pair of glasses, but imagine these being build into a helmet ... It certainly is going to save lives, both on the motorway, and the battlefield!
Augmented Reality is the way to go for glasses. Microsoft did nail that one.
The video Microsoft showed is based on how AR might look like in the future. The glasses were already reviewed by other sites like Engadget and Microsoft's video doesn't even marginally reflect the quality and features presented:
1- The imagery are projected on a little rectangular screen behind the deceptive curved front, meaning there is no immersive experience.
2- The projected images are translucent and do not cast shadows, opposite of what their video showed.
All in all the headset is like any other AR headset, as one article concludes "HoloLens is clearly very early, and kinda sucks right now."
This is a typical Microsoft they over promise, to create a frenzy, then the under deliver.
Unbelievable. This has all the hallmarks of a legacy Ballmer project that intended to capitalize on the false perception that GOOGLE GLASS was going to be a game changer, and indicative of the Ballmer era that sunk Microsoft: Playing catch-up with inferior products.
I don't think to many people thought Google Glass was a Game Changer. It's nothing more then a HUD running Android. (Heads Up Display). They've been around for a long time in a number of forms. Hell you play games with a HUD on screen. Do a Google search and find all different types of HUD's. This thing from MS is interesting, but again, I don't see much use for it but in a commercial Environment. MS game zero release dat, just sometime in the lifespan of Windows 10 it'll get released. So that's in a year, or 8 years from now. Of course there's no price for it either. So MS just threw out a Hail Mary. By the time MS throws it out into the market, it could look completely different. and suck all that much more to keep the price down where people will buy it. People sure won't buy it at $1500.
In technology, "potential" is a code word for "there is no audience for this product and we don't know how to sell it." You know what also had "potential"? The Segway.
I have my doubts too, but...
Some years ago I remember seeing a system that used a couple of microphones and some DSP to analyse the shock wave from high speed projectiles in flight to compute their originating point.
I can imagine a networked squad with each member having a microphone and wearing something like these that would superimpose on their view virtual projectile traces in the air and locator marks for the source/s, even from behind cover.
Could be useful.
It would be a runaway success if IKEA included a QR code on their flatpacks so that you had a VR assembly instruction and guide in sight.
Cooking recipes and guides. DIY surgery... hmmmm....
F1 -> https://translate.google.com/