Given the lack of enthusiasm in the developer community to embrace and incorporate Force Touch, AR, Files, multitasking, Apple Watch, etc into their apps, I don't see this gaining much traction. The problem is Apple generally dumps this stuff out there in hopes that developers will find a use case.
I quite agree. Apple can produce the greatest AR headset in the world -- but its developers and their apps that will make it useful. And your example of the Apple Watch is appropriate. The watch and its OS is outstanding, but Apple has not only failed to attract developers to it, some have said that they put up roadblocks. (But the AW, was strong enough to overcome that unfortunate handicap)
Given the lack of enthusiasm in the developer community to embrace and incorporate Force Touch, AR, Files, multitasking, Apple Watch, etc into their apps, I don't see this gaining much traction. The problem is Apple generally dumps this stuff out there in hopes that developers will find a use case.
I quite agree. Apple can produce the greatest AR headset in the world -- but its developers and their apps that will make it useful. And your example of the Apple Watch is appropriate. The watch and its OS is outstanding, but Apple has not only failed to attract developers to it, some have said that they put up roadblocks. (But the AW, was strong enough to overcome that unfortunate handicap)
Not a lot I want AW to do that isn't already built in. I"m certainly not going to run any significant apps on it instead of my phone. AR/VR are completely different (and are really two different things). For those, I want the apps in a headset instead of holding my phone up.
what ever Tim Apple want to make, please do not make it too Geeky like prof. Mann's glasses - you got baned from restuarant and people try to avoid you like measles. please make it stand out - not like hollywood star to media personality. Something like white ear buds that standout from the others, but classy. please make it cool - but not like military HUD - look like enlarged fly eyes (or starwar Dark Vader). please incorperate TiO2 transition glass - so it will shade at beach (slightly shade should be fine... too dark will impede selection of proper beach drink, confuse tip of 1 dollar bill from 5 dollars ;-). please make it light, so I don't have to "body builder" my neck strength. please use digital lens - select location in the lens that display characters properly, without force user to change focus or tade off focus between far sight and near sight... I am looking forward to see the final version of the "smart" glasses. (please make accessory that can clip on to the glasses to make it night vision - so we can bring it during camping season - want to see what animal stealing our food at night ;-) - optional of course.
Funny article, applauding every product Apple came to improve and then citing Siri’s exclusive accomplishment: being first in the market... Anyway, “everyone can code” => Tim better hurry up with all his promises (...)
For the foreseeable future, hand tracking on mobile AR will be limited within the view. There is simply not enough battery and processor bandwidth to include additional cameras for hand tracking.
Any hand tracking in the view can register virtual buttons and keyboards, maybe use the haptic feedback in the AW to provide a tactile response. Future of this tech could be a band on each wrist that detects hand motion and uses low intensity electrical stimulus for virtual touch.
I think the glass will have to be a thin client, like the Apple Watch, with the iPhone doing all the processing for the first few years. Probably a lot like the glasses by North: https://www.bynorth.com/focals Using a subtle ring control seems smart, as hand gesturing and voice control is probably not preferable in public. Limited use-cases for public use, wayfinding and simple information lookup/notifications. Would be nice if object recognition through the camera worked very well.
I think the glass will have to be a thin client, like the Apple Watch, with the iPhone doing all the processing for the first few years. Probably a lot like the glasses by North: https://www.bynorth.com/focals Using a subtle ring control seems smart, as hand gesturing and voice control is probably not preferable in public. Limited use-cases for public use, wayfinding and simple information lookup/notifications. Would be nice if object recognition through the camera worked very well.
That makes sense! And, it's the kind of thing Apple excels at.
So if my AR Glasses mask & replace the whole scene with generated visuals, that’s not VR?
I get where you're going with that, but I don't think that's even close to possible at this point. If you look at current VR technology and the lenses and field of view requirements and isolating the display from outside distractions, that's a totally different engineering case than AR glasses doing an overlay on things directly in front of you and not blocking peripheral vision, etc.
You way underestimate the current state of VR when you say "If either were any good, you'd be using one or the other, daily."
I bought a VR system a year ago and use it daily and in the process have lost about 50 lbs and vastly improved my health. Once it's all set up, it's fantastic. It's nearly completely replaced television for entertainment for me.
Everyone I've ever shown the VR game Beat Saber too loves it. Most of them I can't recommend a VR system or because of the two main problems VR has right now.
1 - it's too expensive. It cost about $2k to set up a good VR system.
2 - it's too complicated. I have to be the one to set it up and get it ready for my family to use. And even I get frustrated when I have to take off the headset to use the windows desktop to fix an error.
Both of these issues are about to change for the better when Oculus Quest comes out in the spring. Entry price will drop from $2k to $399. And no more dealing with windows.
I don't count Oculus Go as lowering the entry point price because it lacks 6 degrees of freedom and doesn't track your hands. It's great for watching a movie on an airplane (get a movie theater sized screen), but not so great for playing games.
PSVR is way more affordable than that and is "good enough" for most users. It's incredible for a 1st gen console product.
So if my AR Glasses mask & replace the whole scene with generated visuals, that’s not VR?
No, that's AR, or possibly MR (mixed reality). If it's creating a world or view that doesn't exist in your current environment, that's virtual. If it's recreating or adding to the world that is currently physically around you, that's augmented or mixed. It might seem like a fine line, but I don't think it is. VR isn't based on your real surroundings, AR is.
You way underestimate the current state of VR when you say "If either were any good, you'd be using one or the other, daily."
I bought a VR system a year ago and use it daily and in the process have lost about 50 lbs and vastly improved my health. Once it's all set up, it's fantastic. It's nearly completely replaced television for entertainment for me.
Everyone I've ever shown the VR game Beat Saber too loves it. Most of them I can't recommend a VR system or because of the two main problems VR has right now.
1 - it's too expensive. It cost about $2k to set up a good VR system.
2 - it's too complicated. I have to be the one to set it up and get it ready for my family to use. And even I get frustrated when I have to take off the headset to use the windows desktop to fix an error.
Both of these issues are about to change for the better when Oculus Quest comes out in the spring. Entry price will drop from $2k to $399. And no more dealing with windows.
I don't count Oculus Go as lowering the entry point price because it lacks 6 degrees of freedom and doesn't track your hands. It's great for watching a movie on an airplane (get a movie theater sized screen), but not so great for playing games.
PSVR is way more affordable than that and is "good enough" for most users. It's incredible for a 1st gen console product.
@alandail, I think you slightly overstate the cost for most of the users who would actually be interested in VR. Yes, if one were to try to get into the Oculus or Vive without any current PC investment, it could cost that much, so for the non-gamer, it can really be a non-starter. However, most people who play games or are involved in a commercial space in which VR would be a cost effective benefit will already have much of the hardware needed. The biggest investment might be a new video card (and the lowest spec one the Rift supports is very affordable right now), and potentially a USB 3 card.
$1,000 is still nothing to sneeze at, of course, so even gamers might balk, but I bought a Rift+Touch for $400, and a new 1070 video card (before miners caused the prices to skyrocket) for about $350, I think. And boy am I glad I did. A literal game changer. Elite Dangerous, Skyrim and Space Pirate Trainer (basically galaga in VR) are amazing in a VR world.
As for PSVR, @fastasleep, I think you understate the cost. One still has to buy a PS4 or PS4 Pro to use it, so "more affordable" yes, but not "way more affordable".
You way underestimate the current state of VR when you say "If either were any good, you'd be using one or the other, daily."
I bought a VR system a year ago and use it daily and in the process have lost about 50 lbs and vastly improved my health. Once it's all set up, it's fantastic. It's nearly completely replaced television for entertainment for me.
Everyone I've ever shown the VR game Beat Saber too loves it. Most of them I can't recommend a VR system or because of the two main problems VR has right now.
1 - it's too expensive. It cost about $2k to set up a good VR system.
2 - it's too complicated. I have to be the one to set it up and get it ready for my family to use. And even I get frustrated when I have to take off the headset to use the windows desktop to fix an error.
Both of these issues are about to change for the better when Oculus Quest comes out in the spring. Entry price will drop from $2k to $399. And no more dealing with windows.
I don't count Oculus Go as lowering the entry point price because it lacks 6 degrees of freedom and doesn't track your hands. It's great for watching a movie on an airplane (get a movie theater sized screen), but not so great for playing games.
PSVR is way more affordable than that and is "good enough" for most users. It's incredible for a 1st gen console product.
@alandail, I think you slightly overstate the cost for most of the users who would actually be interested in VR. Yes, if one were to try to get into the Oculus or Vive without any current PC investment, it could cost that much, so for the non-gamer, it can really be a non-starter. However, most people who play games or are involved in a commercial space in which VR would be a cost effective benefit will already have much of the hardware needed. The biggest investment might be a new video card (and the lowest spec one the Rift supports is very affordable right now), and potentially a USB 3 card.
$1,000 is still nothing to sneeze at, of course, so even gamers might balk, but I bought a Rift+Touch for $400, and a new 1070 video card (before miners caused the prices to skyrocket) for about $350, I think. And boy am I glad I did. A literal game changer. Elite Dangerous, Skyrim and Space Pirate Trainer (basically galaga in VR) are amazing in a VR world.
As for PSVR, @fastasleep, I think you understate the cost. One still has to buy a PS4 or PS4 Pro to use it, so "more affordable" yes, but not "way more affordable".
I’d say less than half of his $2K is “way more affordable”. And yes, way way more affordable if you already have a PS4, which many people do.
For the foreseeable future, hand tracking on mobile AR will be limited within the view. There is simply not enough battery and processor bandwidth to include additional cameras for hand tracking.
Any hand tracking in the view can register virtual buttons and keyboards, maybe use the haptic feedback in the AW to provide a tactile response. Future of this tech could be a band on each wrist that detects hand motion and uses low intensity electrical stimulus for virtual touch.
Just watched the Microsoft Hololens 2 presentation and hand tracking is much improved.
Comments
find someone with a Vive or Rift VR system and play Beat Saber, you'll probably change your mind.
AR/VR are completely different (and are really two different things). For those, I want the apps in a headset instead of holding my phone up.
Anyway, “everyone can code” => Tim better hurry up with all his promises (...)
Any hand tracking in the view can register virtual buttons and keyboards, maybe use the haptic feedback in the AW to provide a tactile response. Future of this tech could be a band on each wrist that detects hand motion and uses low intensity electrical stimulus for virtual touch.
Using a subtle ring control seems smart, as hand gesturing and voice control is probably not preferable in public. Limited use-cases for public use, wayfinding and simple information lookup/notifications. Would be nice if object recognition through the camera worked very well.
PSVR is way more affordable than that and is "good enough" for most users. It's incredible for a 1st gen console product.
$1,000 is still nothing to sneeze at, of course, so even gamers might balk, but I bought a Rift+Touch for $400, and a new 1070 video card (before miners caused the prices to skyrocket) for about $350, I think. And boy am I glad I did. A literal game changer. Elite Dangerous, Skyrim and Space Pirate Trainer (basically galaga in VR) are amazing in a VR world.
As for PSVR, @fastasleep, I think you understate the cost. One still has to buy a PS4 or PS4 Pro to use it, so "more affordable" yes, but not "way more affordable".