Google Glass is Dead, Long Live (Die?) Microsoft HoloLens

Augmented reality meets the big MS:

First take: Somehow, a major tech company managed to make a pair of smart glasses look even lamer than Google Glass. Second take: Microsoft will struggle with most or all of the social stigmas that made Glass such a Daily Show-worthy laughing stock that it was recently taken out in back and put down.

Third take: Maybe I'm being cynical and jaded and NWN readers can convince me otherwise. Can you?

Please share this post:

Comments

[Virtuasenior]

If I would have to choose between an Oculus Rift and this I would go for this. Hololens seems to have much more power behind it compared to the oculus Rift. I even think this device can do what an Oculus Rift can do. It is also practical because with an Oculus Rift you cannot look outside the shoebox that is strapped to your face and this shifts easy between worlds.

Women will like this as they can multi-task with it.

Hololens seems to be a real technological step forward compared to Oculus the cellphone strapped in front of your eyes. Oculus looks more like a device used to train soldiers or rescue workers and Hololens looks a much more mainstream solution.

Magic Leap just filed a ton of patents showing very similar specifications compared with Hololens.

[Wolkenreiter]

Interesting concept, but I doubt the actual experience will be anything like in that video. The holograms will probably lack contrast, look pixelated and there will be a noticable jitter...
Comparing this to Oculus Rift is comparing apples to pears, since this will never be able to create the illusion of being somewhere else...

[Vivienne Daguerre]

I want one!!

[Iggy]

With this rig they are offering Windows 10 as a free upgrade. Even this Microsoft-hater is impressed by their attempt to innovate.

MS bets on the side of augmented reality, which seems to me a better bet than box-on-head VR. This rig still has the geek-look going, and all such rigs will flop with mainstream consumers and The Daily Show until the rigs become nearly invisible. Otherwise we'd all be wearing Bluetooth headsets.

I don't know if the developers had the freedom from Redmond's stifling cornflower-blue-icon corporate culture that MS Bristol had. That team gave us Kinect, one of the firm's few true innovations.

[Kitty Revolver]

if Google Glass couldn't sell a set of "glasses" then how is MS going to sell this. I like the idea of augmented reality, but honestly how do you sell to a mass market that 1) looks goofy (and you are going to wear it in everyday life to really use it) 2) actually creates the need to be more connected when we have Facebook, dropbox, linkedin, smartphones, etc and 3) the concept comes with 3D design tools? I realize I found the flaw of SL and perhaps people will commit to this, but it doesn't strike me as a "need" quite yet. Smartwatches and smartphones keep everything in your pocket/wrist, why add more hardware for everyday? That is what makes smartphones so "need-y." I have email, phone, internet, dating, books, newspaper, etc on one "small" device that is light and carriable has everything I need for the day. Why do I need a new device to watch Netflix when I can watch it on my computer/tablet/phone? My phone and cloud computing can augment what I need it too and honestly that is all I really need.

Occulus is different because it is designed with VR in mind and specific applications. It looks silly, but you are not going to wear it everyday.

Once VR hits it big, then maybe we can start thinking about everyday augmented reality. It is too much of a jump for most consumers and some people don't even have smartphones because they don't want to be that connected.

[Kitty Revolver]

BTW. I'm writing master's project on smartphones so a dialogue would be helpful.

[TribeGadgets]

I don't think you are being all that cynical - it was my initial response. But MS might just have sold me on this - mostly because of the actual building demo (with an onlookers viewpoint). That I can use right now, with a little integration. As my toolkit of choice is near enough all open source I can see that happening.
Glass was just marketed badly and easy to mock. Even the beebs tech reporter said it looked 'dorky'. Never got to try the rift so really have no idea what it would feel like and any 'flat' demos were just that - flat.
@Kitty, I stopped carrying a phone around almost a decade ago, possibly because if I need any of that stuff I prefer the ability to walk away when I feel like it and like it with a big 'Off' switch in one easy to use place :)

[Cube Republic]

Google glass was made for being out and about, while the microsoft system seems to be designed for being in the house.

[Cube Republic]

Google glass was made for being out and about, while the microsoft system seems to be designed for being in the house.

[Indigo Mertel]

I agree with @Cube. Why everyone assumes HoloLens should be used as Google Glass, such as something to be worn all the time? HoloLens seems to be an entirely different beast. It seems to be more like a tool for specific needs. For some professional applications this may be revolutionary. If it really works, that is.

[Indigo Mertel]

I fthis thing work it is a step closer to World Builder https://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_4127600295&feature=iv&src_vid=VzFpg271sm8&v=QP3YywgRx5A

[Batters Box]

The trick to mass market may not prove so much the platforms but the glue that integrates useful devices. My desk is not really enhanced by the printer sitting there but it is useful and cannot be replaced for certain situations. With 3D printing becoming less expensive many people will find augmented reality much better for interacting and viewing 3d objects before producing them then a myopic immersive possibly more difficult to calibrate and synchronize immersive platfom may be..

[E I Consulting]

Google Glass totally failed so I suspect HoloLens will do the same.