I definitely want HoloLens to be real, too, but to avoid heartbreak I'll temper my hopes until more reports come in. Or, even better, a firsthand experience.
I've never used a Kinect; how does the promo video live up to reality? It's looks almost identical to what I still assume Kinect is like, minus perhaps some of the highest fidelity parts like the skateboarding and soccer which I imagine have been attempted but turn out too clunky to be worthwhile. Am I wrong?
No. The problem is Google kept trying to force Glass as a consumer product for use in public.
And given that most normal people would know that it was socially awkward to use it in public only "glassholes" remained. This meant that buying/wearing Glass tarnished you with that label and associated you with that group.
This has become forgotten as the public perception of Glass became dominated by the whole "glassholes" phenomenon, but the Explorer Program was supposed to demonstrate that people could think up these kind of amazing life-altering apps that proved the utility of bothering to wear Glass.
They didn't. Years later, the reason to wear Glass remained "take pictures/videos hands free and shave 3 seconds off the time it takes you to check your text messages."
The MS product seems pretty clearly to be more broadly capable hardware, but I do still wonder if it will have actual applications.
The main application that sells it is likely to be less specialised than the cool demos, which are always a bit niche (modelling industrial design for motorbikes etc).
I wonder if its "killer app" might just be that now a virtually big screen takes up little physical space/weight.
Clear the big monitor off your desk, now your 11" laptop (or smaller) can effectively have a 40" screen, etc.
Unlike Oculus, you can still see the real world. Unlike Google Glass, it's a big display and not an awkward eye movement.
There's still the barriers of
- showing other people stuff
- social awkwardness of sitting with a keyboard seeming (to others) to be staring into empty space while working
- it might feel like wearing a hat
- what's the effective pixel density like?
This is the clear winner for me. A portable, wireless keyboard + hololens = the biggest virtual desktop in the world that also doesn't shut you out from reality / coworkers / your desk / etc. Whether or not the more ambitious use-cases ever materialize, I'd be happy to trade in my macbook for this.
The focal point is a problem. It is advised to keep your screen at >65cm so your eye doesn't have to accomodate (coincidentally, the length of your arms). A big problem of Google Glass is the focal point is a few cm away and it is known to give headaches. The smaller the screen is, the more myopic you become.
It is absolutely possible to use a lens system to move the focal point to the distance, but hasn't been done yet, probably because you can't do it on 120x120 degrees.
I wouldn't work on a virtual screen for long hours until there's an answer to that. But once it is solved, I can see how we'll all become Holographic addicts ;)
Surely they must have sorted out the focus issue for HoloLens -- otherwise that Minecraft demo where the castle is on the table would have felt very trip for the journalist (if you consider where the castle touches the table, you'd have a joint that is both several feet and a couple of centimetres from your eye)
I had an idea to do something similar once for a Uni dissertation, involving a rift mounted with two cameras to do a very hacky and cheap prototype version of what you've described.
My supervisor shot it down because "Google glass will do that" :(
I think it's hard to say whether nobody used it because there were no killer apps, or whether there are were no killer apps because no one wanted to use it.
Ya the screen wasn't that great and was awkward to look at. Seems like the photo taking is the best part of it -- for that you don't really need all the rest of the complexity. And too bad you also look like a douchbag wearing it, especially in SF where tech is stigmatized enough. Reminds me of a joke a comic said last night at an SF standup spot: "so I was on google last night... Do you guys know Google? It's this company making people homeless in SF"
"7. On that note, don't give one to Robert Scoble"
It's not that Google Glass intrinsically makes you look like a narcissistic douchebag, it's that the first people to show them off were narcissistic douchebags, posing with their smug self important "look at me I want your attention" expressions, who crystallized the image of the "glasshole" in everyone's minds.
What it reminds me of, is Google Project Tango, which also has the NASA's JPL listed as a partner[1]. Also worth mentioning, is Johnny Lee, who worked for Microsoft Kinect, and is now working at Google for project Tango.
First thing, it crashes, a lot. We're talking 2-5 minutes active 3d scanning before the structure sensor driver bites the big one. Requires killing and restarting service along with all programs associated.
Also had hard freezes as well.
Its "google quality" in other words, crap. It might get better. It probably won't, given their track history regarding consumer devices in "google beta" (read as alpha).
As far as I can tell, a big difference is that Google's concept video looks very little like actually using it, whereas Microsoft's is clearly just a better version of their live demo. The live demo was amazing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5R1snVxGNVs
I think Google over-promised initially which lead to many being underwhelmed with Glass. I hope Microsoft isn't making the same mistake here.