Microsoft HoloLens [Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality, Holograms]

hoom said:
I guess thats some kind of response to the news they fired the engineering staff & are changing tech?
http://wccftech.com/hololens-might-use-different-tech-after-microsoft-fires-60-engineers/
Click to expand...

The team consists of 60 engineers, 30 of those are permanent employees which are given one month to find a new job within Microsoft. The other 30 engineers involve contracted workers, which are fired immediately.

According Ynet, the group was working on the HoloLens for the past 2 and a half years, based on technology of a company that Microsoft bought in Israel 6 years ago. Microsoft will now be stopping the project, and continue development on the HoloLens through a different technology, produced in the US.
 
Those videos are not representative of what the person will see, I wish they would stop doing that...show us the actual PoV.
 
iroboto said:
Microsoft is showcasing some Hololens stuff on twitter. Some of the pet projects are pretty cute.
https://twitter.com/hashtag/MadeWithHoloLens?src=hash

From what i understand what we are seeing here (in these videos) the hololens is recording and displaying the AR at the same time. I'm unsure if this is representative of what the viewer sees still. But it's definitely real.
Click to expand...

One of the devs posted how they are doing it. They are compositing the actual AR generated image (that the user will see) over what the front facing camera is capturing.

Sebastian Sylvan ‏@ssylvan 8h8 hours ago

@TerryDube Not my vid. Compositing what you see in real time on top of front facing cam (no special HW, just a hololens).
Click to expand...

Apparently all being done on the worn Hololens device. It's also possibly larger than the actual FOV of the physical device.

and more confirmation...

Noble Smith ‏@ShireWisdom Nov 30

@DannyT @HoloLens @jaykannan Hey Dan! Yes, that's how I recorded that video. Everything that you see you can record.
Click to expand...

I'm wondering if one of them has actually had an accident like this... :D

Sebastian Sylvan ‏@ssylvan 7h7 hours ago

@igame4games This is actually @varun_mani's video, not mine. Watch out for stairs if you play on the move :)
Click to expand...

Regards,
SB
 
Last edited:
The FOV is still small. Paul talked about it on windows weekly. However remember those who used it when it was still worn on a belt have said the FOV was bigger in those dev kits. So the FOV being small doesn't seem to be something they are stuck with and it sounds like we have at least a year before consumer stuff hits at this point , most likely 2 to 3 years sadly. So we will be way past cherry trail and willow trail. So if its a performance issue holding back the fov we should be past that. If its a power issue we could be past that with newer intel chips using less power and hopefully the cameras and other tech using less power also. If its a cost on the lenses problem then we might not see the FOV come back up unless producing more of them in scale will drive the cost down.
 
eastmen said:
The FOV is still small. Paul talked about it on windows weekly. However remember those who used it when it was still worn on a belt have said the FOV was bigger in those dev kits. So the FOV being small doesn't seem to be something they are stuck with and it sounds like we have at least a year before consumer stuff hits at this point , most likely 2 to 3 years sadly. So we will be way past cherry trail and willow trail. So if its a performance issue holding back the fov we should be past that. If its a power issue we could be past that with newer intel chips using less power and hopefully the cameras and other tech using less power also. If its a cost on the lenses problem then we might not see the FOV come back up unless producing more of them in scale will drive the cost down.
Click to expand...

Could it be a physics or tech issue where it isn't possible regardless of the cost at this point?
 
goonergaz said:
I thought it'd already been clarified that the FoV isn't changing (in any big way) due to the limit of the tech?
Click to expand...

Well, the FOV was noticeably wider in the original demo units. Then 6 months later, the FOV got noticeably narrower. There's always a chance for it to go back to the original FOV. But without knowing why the change was made, it's difficult to make any guesses as to whether that would or could happen.

Regards,
SB
 
BadTB25 said:
Could it be a physics or tech issue where it isn't possible regardless of the cost at this point?
Click to expand...

well it was possible because the original units had a higher FOV. So we don't know why it changed. We know the FOV got smaller when the units became contained around your head. So like I said it could be computational limits , it could be power draw limits . But it doesn't seem a problem with the actual tech itself
 
The original FOV was still a window though. We've discussed the reasons why and the answer from those who knew more about this sort of thing was that the tech is limiting. The current small window may be to get more fidelity (same res shrunk to small area) or somesuch. Power doesn't seem like a reason. They could maintain the larger FOV and just draw to a smaller area, leaving the more peripheral space for simpler things like text not requiring processing power.
 
Shifty Geezer said:
The original FOV was still a window though. We've discussed the reasons why and the answer from those who knew more about this sort of thing was that the tech is limiting. The current small window may be to get more fidelity (same res shrunk to small area) or somesuch. Power doesn't seem like a reason. They could maintain the larger FOV and just draw to a smaller area, leaving the more peripheral space for simpler things like text not requiring processing power.
Click to expand...

I still maintain that safety is likely the #1 reason. Microsoft envision corporations/businesses using this while walking around in work environments. Some of the tweets by Hololens developers indicate there is still an element of risk to personal safety (stairs, for example) when using this while moving around if one focuses too much on the holographic projections.

Since the projections can occlude real life objects reasonably well, if the FOV were to be too large, there's the potential for the Holographic projections to cover something (say near the feet of the person in their immediate walking path) that is of potential danger to the user.

Regards,
SB
 
As far as I can tell, the tech Microsoft used for hololens have limitations based on the refractive index of the material used. High refractive index materials are stupidly expensive, and even the best don't provide a wide FOV with any known holographic waveguide techniques. The tech looks like a dead end.

I wonder if this new development have something to do with Magic Leap releasing real footage, shot through the lens. Analysts previously thought they were nowhere near showing something like this. It has a wide FOV and a lightfield projection. Both of which are major features missing from hololens.

MS could always license this instead and get back in the game.
 
MrFox said:
As far as I can tell, the tech Microsoft used for hololens have limitations based on the refractive index of the material used. High refractive index materials are stupidly expensive, and even the best don't provide a wide FOV with any known holographic waveguide techniques. The tech looks like a dead end.

I wonder if this new development have something to do with Magic Leap releasing real footage, shot through the lens. Analysts previously thought they were nowhere near showing something like this. It has a wide FOV and a lightfield projection. Both of which are major features missing from hololens.

MS could always license this instead and get back in the game.
Click to expand...

This could be the issue. We simply don't know yet. Like I said the change to a smaller FOV was when the whole unit became self contained on your head. So yes it could be that the lenses are expensive. However if that was the case I would wager MS would have stopped persuing it.

The claims of the FOV not changing were with comments to the dev units coming out. The final consumer grade stuff may still change.

its going to be a really interesting few years as this tech is just amazing and een if its magic leap that makes it happen and not MS is going to be really amazing
 
I'm pretty sure I read the FoV is stuck until a newer technology is realised (so a fair few years off). If it were for 'saftey' reasons they would demonstrate much larger than the current FoV and then lower it stating 'for saftey reasons'.
 
Article: https://www.petri.com/microsoft-sha...to-5-5-hour-battery-life-device-link-and-more

At an event in Tel Aviv, Bruce Harris, a Microsoft Technical Evangelist, shared new details about the company’s upcoming Hololens. The highly anticipated device will start shipping to developers this quarter but the company has not announced yet when the device will generally available to consumer or enterprise clients.

Bruce notes that any universal application that can currently run on Windows 10, will run natively, out of the box, on Hololens and the device is “totally wireless” and uses Wi-Fi and Bluetooth for communication. In fact, there will not be a wired option for this device.

Battery life, while it depends on your usage, can run up to 5.5 hours and under heavy load is closer to 2.5 hours when pushing the device to its limits; anything can connect to the device, as long as it supports Wi-Fi or Bluetooth.
...
One of the other unique experiences that you can do with a Hololens is to link devices together to share an experience; in this mode, two or more users can view an object at the same time. To accomplish this, devices do not have to be in the same room and can share the link over the Internet. Of course, this depends on available bandwidth, but that’s a common restraint for any Internet connected device.
Click to expand...
 
Hopefully when they finally get around to shipping business and eventually consumer version, they'll have upped the battery life. 2.5-5.5 hours isn't so bad for a dev. device, but for in the field use, I'd imagine many companies would potentially want something more. Then again if it's meant to be used in short stints it won't be so bad if it has a very fast charging time.

Regards,
SB
 
Yeah, if they can get those turbo chargers, like the PDP 60 second game controller chargers ( http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/12...r-in-under-60-seconds-with-pdps-super-charger ), it might not be so bad. Recharge fully during a bathroom break.

The 2.5 to 5.5 hour play time is the same range as the WuuBlets controller, perhaps slightly longer.

I wouldn't be surprised to see some sort of plug and play recharger kit for the consumer version.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Augmented Reality or Mixed Reality User Experience Survey
Replies
1
Views
442
Albuquerque
Albuquerque
E
Microsoft Mesh
Replies
2
Views
3K
manux
M
R
Gaming and gaming hardware trends
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
eastmen
E
W
Apple Vision Pro
4 5 6
Replies
101
Views
21K
Karamazov
K
R
State of GDeflate *spawn
2
Replies
25
Views
2K
Remij
R
Back
Top