It's interesting how they go out of their way to describe this as NOT augmented reality when... that's exactly what it is. The only time the term appears on the product page is here:
"Microsoft HoloLens goes beyond augmented reality and virtual reality by enabling you to interact with three-dimensional holograms blended with your real world. "
I understand the marketing reasons for this, but contrast this with the fact that Oculus embraces the term "virtual reality" despite the baggage that comes with it and the fact that they can't trademark it. I guess AR never caught the public imagination like VR did.
AR is traditionally a 2D projection on 3D space. This is a 3D projection that you interact with. Sure, its still AR on some level, but I think differentiating the product makes a lot of sense. My idea of AR is a boring HUD-like system that fits in with things like flying fighter jets. This holographic projection is different and notably so.
MS could find the middle ground between lush 3D VR-like environments and the real world. I find things like the Oculus and other HMDs to be terribly claustrophobic and dizzying. Not to mention really asocial. I don't want to mount a tissue-box size thing to my face that removes the real world. I'd prefer having the real world still here with the digital world tied to it. There just seems to be something wrong with giving software my entire field of view. I don't want to stare into the same Unity3D generated environments. I want to augment my real world life, not replace it.
>MS could find the middle ground between lush 3D VR-like environments and the real world.
Back around 2000 a Slashdot article reported an attempt to create a human-sized hamster ball constructed of a semi-opaque projection-friendly surface. The ball would sit on some sort of roller mount. Five projection screens surrounding the ball would project a virtual environment over the "port", "starboard", "fore", "aft", and "north" surfaces. A human occupant would enter the ball, and, based on his movement detected through the roller base, be presented with a continually updating holodeck-like virtual environment.
Perhaps something like this is still in development somewhere.
When we say virtual reality, there is this implicit expectation (at least in my mind) that its an always ON experience. The Video here did show some of that too but I think scoping it to specific tasks at least initially would be very powerful. So you don't wear these bulky, dorky glasses/headsets all day long but only when you need to do specific things. And then you return to your normal life.
In the early days of computer, the usage was like that...very task oriented. When you are done you go back to your non-digital life. It's only when the technology and public perception changes, you start carrying PCs in your pocket all day long like we are doing today.
Right - but let's say they get less dorky and more comfortable - and really do have the visual quality we really want - objects look solid and real.
That seems much more useful than a VR that you have to plug out of the real world and immerse yourself in - at least for collaboration with others on real world things... like the example with the motorbike design.
"Microsoft HoloLens goes beyond augmented reality and virtual reality by enabling you to interact with three-dimensional holograms blended with your real world. "
I understand the marketing reasons for this, but contrast this with the fact that Oculus embraces the term "virtual reality" despite the baggage that comes with it and the fact that they can't trademark it. I guess AR never caught the public imagination like VR did.