If you’d rather not click (and I totally understand) let me tell you that the Leap 2 costs between $3200 for the base model and up to $5000 for the enterprise model, which gives you a better viewpoint.
At $3200 you can just get a Simula One VR[1], which will do everything and more, with less bullshit, and an eye to real usability. I can't understand getting a Magic Leap anything for any amount of money, let alone thousands. They've outed themselves as absolute grifters lol.
It’s a completely different group of people now. Nearly no one from the original management remained in Magic Leap, so I don’t think it’s fair to judge them by the actions of their predecessors.
They kept the name, no? I don't begrudge new people wanting to make a new product out of the husk of a defunct company, like Ophiocordyceps. I'm skeptical of people who think the branding and marketing of V1 was A-ok though.
Some of the worst engineers I've known wound up there (and are still there). Not necessarily bad people, just borderline frauds. I don't trust their organization to do much credible work as a result.
Many left, others were laid off. Some remain. But they had some world class engineering talent (like in their optics - real domain experts they brought from other places and industries). The goals were unrealistic, the product was out of touch with the market (lots of money raised is going to do that 9/10 times), the top management were professional corporate creatures (not in a good sense). But some of the engineers were very good - just sent on the wrong mission.
I have been really looking forward to this. It’s a shame that the video is so awful! Why would anybody go to a coffee shop or public park to put on a VR headset? What were they thinking???
Are the other customers with laptops supposed to look creeped out and angry at him? I imagine the direction they were aiming for is envy, but it looks like they want the weirdo to leave.
It worked in making me interested in the product at least. A standalone headset with Linux and not by Facebook? Those details are all I needed to know regardless of any marketing video.
Also watching him try to put that cup of coffee to his face was painful. You’d look like such a tool trying to press that cup against your headset. No wonder they cut that scene so quickly.
According to the expressions on the other peoples’ faces, it seems like there was actually some awareness of how ridiculous it was. Those aren’t expressions of amazement. They’re more like “look at that guy trying to drink coffee with a VR headset on his face. What a tool!”
except they aren't shipping yet .... I'm a big fan but you really can't count it as a comparison until its really in production. They have barely assembled prototype units yet let alone got the tech fully working.
And even then, its a completely different thing. The magic leap is true AR with real world pass through and full hand tracking. Whether its any good or not I don't know but the use cases they are targeting - surgeons etc are not going to strap a SimlarVR to their head.
If both companies are successful (a big "If"), this means in some years, we'll be hitting another sci-fi milestone for what the future looks like. Thousands of dollars today, but in ~10 years, smartphone prices and hopefully smartphone battery life.
It took a bit longer than we'd have liked, but like... Our present is starting to look like the future imagined back when I was a kid. It's very exciting.
This is the same thing people said about the HoloLens 1 at the same price point 6 years ago. I’m skeptical since neither of these are a consumer product and the price hasn’t moved much.
It's interesting, the Cyberpunk style worlds were made in the 80s when Japan was still dominant, so people thought Japan would continue dominating. But that didn't quite turn out how we expected. So it's funny to see Japan still so prominently depicted in future settings, kanji on buildings and people with katana running around, but it's nowhere near like that in the real world.
TLDR. Some of the Mall Ninja's comments seem to have been prophetic though:
> What good are the cops going to be if a shooter shows up at your
> workplace??? How about your kid’s school, remember Columbine? I’ll
> tell you what the cops will do, call the SWAT team and screw
> around trying to locate the front door for 30 minutes, ...
I just honestly don't think the average person wants VR.
I suspect headsets will become a thing when they're cheaper than TVs - just because the the display will be much better. Combined with ear buds - I think it'll just be a way better budget TV experience for some.
Other than that - I don't ever see it going anywhere near mainstream like cell phones or even smart buds.
The cancer called advertising has already consumed consumer tech, the vast majority of people are complacent with the situation, and the only escape is real-life where cost, technological and physical limitations prevent the same level of advertising (yes there are billboards, but that's nothing compared to what digital advertising has become).
VR would essentially remove all those limitations, and since people are complacent and clearly don't mind it, we'd end up in a world like this video depicts: https://vimeo.com/166807261. Hell, Facebook or "Meta" is going all-in on VR for a reason.
Are we really going to end up in VR worlds outside of gaming though? It seems a horribly inefficient way to do most non-physical tasks compared to just text or voice. Why walk somewhere when I can click a link? The attraction of headsets for me is the potential for an effectively infinite resolution, no-distraction desktop. But that desktop is still largely going to be single planes of text and widgets. And even then, I’m not wearing the thing on a bus so all the other interfaces still need to exist.
Everyone seems desperate for anime Microsoft Bob and I just don’t see it.
So this is for things like projecting onto surfaces or creating 3d models for presentation. Hololens's big example is elevator repair where it projects datasheets onto walls so you can see them without needing a spare hand to hold a phone/document.
Yeah and I think those sorts of use cases are valid. I just thought the comment above was more about the SF depictions of VR (i.e. the metaverse) being close, which I think is fanciful.
Magic Leap is just a zombie at this point. NReal has a better and more realistic strategy.
Historically, Microsoft doesn’t know how to make revolutionary product lines profitable and sustainable long term. Kinect was an amazing concept with consecutive poor execution. My memory might be off but they also had 1st crack at iPod, and their current foray into both VR and AR are both underwhelming so far. MS does best when they wait and copy a proven concept. Even then success isn’t always guaranteed
We still will be hitting sci-fi soon. Just not with those companies. I have more faith in Apple, Sony, and Meta. Google will try again and I would be surprised if Amazon didn’t try as well
> We still will be hitting sci-fi soon. Just not with those companies. I have more faith in Apple, Sony, and Meta. Google will try again and I would be surprised if Amazon didn’t try as well
I just had a really weird realization when reading through your list of potential successors. ("Apple, Sony, and Meta"). There's only one name on that list I root for.
Meta? Fuck no. Obviously not them. Nothing else to say here.
Apple? Eh. Sure. I have no ill will against Apple. I have many reasons to continue admiring what they do, and I have some reasons to oppose them (the walls on the garden seem a little too high). On balance they've dominated consumer tech for the best reason: their shit is solid and innovative.
SONY. It's been too long since they last lead technology and design trends. Sony was the Walkman, the CD, the Trinitron. There's never been a remote control as good as a Sony. They have a sleek-but-utilitarian design aesthetic. In the 80s and 90s, you just couldn't go wrong if you picked a Sony for your TV, stereo, or whatever.
For some reason I really want them to be ascendant again. To have a resurgence the same way Apple did starting with the iMac in 1997.
I think the PS5 shows that they're doing a huge amount of things right. But they don't seem to have the same kind of _vision_ apple does (even if you dislike that vision). They still seem to value hardware over software while I think Apple sees them as inseparable parts of a whole.
They might've had Windows Media stuff to license before the iPod, but the Zune came later. (and the right parody phrase didn't exist then... "Welcome to the social... distancing.")
Smartphone took off thanks to the capacitive touchscreen. Before that people were like "look at that weirdo with his/her bulky phone and stylus, he/she'd be better off with a notepad". VR headsets need a similar technological leap to become mainstream. It is not just price. The key issue is being able to see the wearer's eyes. This is the only thing that can solve the weirdness issue.
This history is a contraction of more than a two decades of continuous development. Watch the matrix (1998) and you will see small, stylish cell phones everywhere. The capacitative touch screen is important, but pretty much everyone who bought a gen1/2 iPhone already used a feature phone that they used chronically.
>Sure hardware, vs. software but still, we're in different leagues.
Interesting choice in the use of the comma. I know this comment leaves nothing towards the furtherment of the discussion, but it was just odd enough to make me have to stop. I know I typo/myspell, grammatically f'up, there/they're/their typo, all the time, so I'm not grammar pro myself, but just trying to see, if maybe, I can use the, comma, too.
Are you saying the enterprise model gives a better viewpoint than the base model, or that the pricing alone gives a better viewpoint into the viability of Magic Leap product(s)?
When I was a kid, a really good pc(like an Alienware) was 3200. Now my phone is more powerful than most of those PCs from back then. I think you'll see continue to see prices fall over time until adoption takes off
To this day, you can't have the price of that PC subsidized or allowed for the price to be paid in installments with a 24 month contract like a phone.
What would happen to the desktop market if they offered up an infinite payment plan that allowed for annual trade-ins/upgrades like phones? We used to do that with leasing companies for data room equipment, but I never saw it for normal user computers (not that I'm well versed in all manners computer leasing).
I’ll never be able to get over the insanely fake promotional video for the original Magic Leap that demonstrated background occlusion, and not the ghostly overlayed image that the headset actually delivered.
The project was presumably shrouded in such secrecy that the marketing folks had no idea what they were actually selling.
pet peeve, thats the exact opposite of the saying. It is very easy to aim for the stars and not land on the moon. However if you aim for the moon and miss, you'll still be among the stars, i.e. lost in the void of deep space.
Meh this could turn out to be a success story. The original founder had more experience in medical and enterprise sales. He wasn’t a B2C type of CEO and probably was surrounded by yes men and the adoring media who fed into his ego.
They obviously over played their hand and they were given tons of hype and probably felt the pressure. Not an excuse obviously. But we shouldn’t shame people for shooting for the moon and landing on earth.
The fact they got some professionals to eventually run it and have real serious applications is ultimately a net positive for society.
Eventually the price and tech might get practical for consumers, it makes sense to go up market / business before consumer.
You are giving the CEO way too much credit. I followed the story from the beginning, and from the beginning it was clear he was lying through his teeth about what the technology was capable of. With his "my amazing technology is so advanced, I can't even secretly tell you how secretly we are secretly keeping the technology advances secret." Pure bullshit, and I'm glad to see someone like that fail.
Bullshitters erode the trust in the ecosystem that honest entrepreneurs rely on. (Yes, Elizabeth Holmes, I'm looking at you)
I’m sorry to say it but “honest entrepreneurs” are just failed bullshitters. Entrepreneurism is attractive because it’s the closest thing to freedom under capitalism, and the closest thing to dictatorship.
> But we shouldn’t shame people for shooting for the moon and landing on earth.
Maybe not, but we should shame them for promising the sun and delivering a rock. It's like if Xerox made a fake ad showing a machine that can clone sheep with a button push, but ended up only delivering a new copier with slightly better performance. It's the kind of outright lie that should be unacceptable from any company.
From what I've heard, their original device was pretty incredible, but large, and they weren't able to keep all the same benefits in the portable version. But that original version is what got everyone so incredibly pumped up.
Yeah, and in that comment he only mentions the existence of focus planes, not hard-edge occlusion (which elsewhere Guttag says is essentially physically impossible)
I didn't say anything about hard-edge occlusion? I guess I see that your original comment was about that, I was just responding to the comments further down.
Especially since some decently big names were supporting them at the time, and for some time afterwards too. Their lack of discipline in messaging really damaged their technical credibility.
I remember that back when they were all the rage (and got huge investments) I met an employee at a coffee shop at an optics conference I was attending (I didn't know who they were at the time). IIRC she had been a postdoc at some research lab until a while before. She obviously didn't talk about what they were doing exactly, but more about the surreal experience working for them after uni. They had just bought several ebeam writers (multimillion $ equipment used in lithography) without anyone really knowing what they would use it for.
It sounded a lot like they were just throwing lots of money at equipment for doing work on hype research topics (metamaterials was a big thing at the time) to see if it could solve some of their problems, but really without much thought on if it makes sense. She was talking about how it was cool to work for a place where there were absolutely no money constrains, but it also sounded a bit like "I am at a company but doing stuff which seems more blue sky research than at uni... Why?".
To me the current wave of quantum computing startups sound very similar.
I made a snarky (maybe somewhat undeserved) tweet comparing Magic Leap to Theranos last year that pissed off Rony Abovitz. He pointed out that they were shipping their enterprise product. I still think the promise was wildly oversold, but at least they are making something.
I think in that analogy, if Holmes had at least accepted limitations and started with a lab that fit on the back of a truck, but still needed a vial of blood as a step 1. The vision may be possible but you gotta start somewhere and you can't just do R&D for 20 years without revenue.
Amusing to see how the new management was put on a mission to eradicate original founder Rony Abovitz’s legacy as part of their rescue. Rony was all about magical experiences and glamour, the new management made the logo ugly, removed any reference to entertainment and uses “Enterprise” more frequently than a Star Trek episode. This is what Magic Leap should always have been, no doubt.
Hey everyone. I'm Jade, VP of Product at Magic Leap.
There's a lot of amazing tech in Magic Leap 2, better optics overall including a bigger FoV, better content solidity and text legibility, our dynamic dimming tech, great spatial audio, a powerful processor and GPU.
It's tough to prove to everyone on HN how far we've come, but seeing is believing. If you get a chance to check it out at a conference or event, give it a shot.
Its still early days for wearable AR in general, but we are really focused on making a great and open platform for developers to build their solutions for visionary businesses who are learning how to use AR in practical ways.
If you have any questions about Magic Leap 2, ask away, I'll try to answer everything I can.
Man, you all are some of the biggest haters I've ever seen.
I've gotten to wear and use both the Magic Leap 1 and Magic Leap 2. These devices are like wearing technology 15 years into the future. It's absolutely wild seeing what is possible. It's crazy because you all are hating so much, but they're out here shipping enterprise products and services and doing it as a first-in-class device.
I'm especially confused because some of you are comparing this device to VR devices when it's a completely different product focus. VR != AR folks. And if you got the chance to try and see it, you would completely understand the vision.
I'm incredibly hyped about Magic Leap and can't wait for this technology to become more widely available. What they're doing there is nuts, and exciting!
My guess is because it’s extremely underwhelming compared much cheaper standalone VR headsets with pass through. I predict the nail in the coffin will come once Apple finally releases the 3rd iteration of their upcoming headset
I couldn't help but laugh as the video kept on going on and revealing more and more inconvenient facets that are synonymous with AR. The tiny glasses, the top band, the cable, etc.
Given their past history I have no idea if this is real or not but I will say its exciting to see the VR/AR/XR space heating up again. If it is real then these will definitely push the boundaries of the form factors currently available and that is great to see.
Having been a VR enthusiast for a while, I will say I am very confident there is something valuable in it. Halving the weight and doubling the resolution of the headsets is within sight and going to truly expand the range of possible / viable applications. What emerges in the end as truly valuable applications is an unknown but that's exactly why its fun to be around during these stages of the tech evolution.
I assume the main sell is that you, I and a few of our friends could sit at a table, play a digital table top game while still being able to see and engage visually with each other?
It's not vaporware. It exists. Maybe not 100% as realistic as the demo, but still very immersive. The only problem is the field of view is still a bit lacking and they cost like $4000-$5000.
I disagree. AR will become big since as we progress VR we'll do as we do with computers. Make smaller versions (like all these mini computers posts on HN) to carry with us, but with VR that is not quite possible since we would to stick cameras on the front of the lenses.
You never see movies with people walking around with big VR headsets, they walk around with AR glasses and that would most probably be in the distant future.
Their main value prop is any sophisticated work requiring extensive pre-planning in group settings or in a physical environment like surgeries, architecture, and work training.
There’s tons of complex jobs like this in the military, healthcare, high end niche manufacturing, etc.
There’s also the sales aspect where you help customers visualize products like a car demo to executives.
The barrier seems to be customization and staffing the implementation. You could generalize some things like certain specialized surgeries and create platforms across other fields. But most might require a mix of 3d, coders, and designers/art directors.
So we could see the equivalent of video production studios or web design shops for AR. Then these same shops will find patterns and develop products to generalize them.
Honestly I don’t think B2B/B2Gov is all that much more of a viable path for AR than B2C is. It’s certainly not the magic key to success that I’ve seen some point to (usually as “ohh yeah the helmet/goggles/headset is ugly, nerdy, and anti-fashionable, but we will just sell to business and the military who will require their employees to use it.”) AR is really going to need a killer app to take off (or at least light the way and show other’s what is possible.)
I hope when Apple announces their AR glasses they have some really, really good apps and demos to show off along with solid development tools; what I don’t want to see is Tim Cook showing off some MOBA game no one has ever heard of and ending with “…and we can’t wait to see what you do with it.”
I managed a team building for Google Glass. These high complexity labor use cases were the promise then as now. But the quiet part is that it’s to de-skill these positions as much as possible. Problem is that in the meanwhile they want highly skilled people to put up with basically nanny-ware strapped to their face.
Architecture is a reality right now, I've seen architects presenting their projects on a VR headset with clients walking outside and inside their projects. It's actually super cool, and a few thousand dollars investment (you're building the model anyway) seems to be worthy for the extra wow factor.
I still just don't see what Magic leap is going to do in that space. If you just need to overlay real world visuals with metadata, you can do it with a consumer grade smart phone for the past 5 years. If you want immersive, then you want VR. The niches that require goggles are tiny.
The biggest problem I see is that there is no control scheme available for now to match that. Even if the glasses delivered 100% on that promise, you'd still have to use a mouse and keyboard to play Total War or Sim City in any reasonable way.
Not to mention, the vast majority of games try to pull you into their world, and make it seem large or even unending. AR directly works against both goals: you are integrating the game into familiar surroundings, and the game space becomes severely limited. Sure, there is some space for things like Pokemon Go or other "bring the magic/tech/? into your daily life", but this is a very limited setting.
From this point of view, I believe gaming with AR is never going to take off (though there could well be space for a handful of extremely popular games, like Minecraft or Pokemon Go), and VR is far more promising in this space. I also think that neither VR nor AR will make any serious impact unless and until some new control scheme is invented that can actually feel different than sitting in front of a screen (but with the screen hanging from your head).
Have you tried Oculus type controllers? They pretty excellent in that it gives you full 3D manipulation and scales well from broad strokes to detail work.
This website is pretty bad in terms of pitching the product. On a Macbook Pro, there is a giant black bar with nothing but the headline, which is then repeated in the video. The video itself tells me nothing about how it can improve an enterprise. And The macro fly-by of the device itself makes sense for a B2C product much mote than it does for a B2B product. Just weak across the board - feels like it might have been done internally even - and that's before we talk about how they've raised $3.5 BILLION dollars.
In another life, I managed a team working on Google Glass and tbh I'm not surprised that they still don't have more compelling use cases. Hands-on training is a relatively niche market. And the medical example - separating conjoined twins - seems like it could be handled just as well or better via VR or just a standard display. The dirty secret of the space is that enterprises want to de-skill labor wherever possible to save costs. But if a step in the value creation process can be truly de-skilled it likely can be automated, and if it can't, human beings learn well enough that they don't need (or want) the goggles strapped to their face for long.
The global dimming feature is insanely good. And it's incredibly easy to use from a development perspective as well. You can simply set the dimming as a percentage value and it hides the world.
It's incredibly impressive and to be honest it's a little surprising how good it is.
I have it on good authority that this link is direct to a cached page from their old site, with the new one being rolled out as we speak. Hence the broken links.
The move from B2C to B2B is curious, it seems like the reason is B2C didn't quite have product market fit. It seems though the more realistic reason was they couldn't actually deliver on time.
If you’d rather not click (and I totally understand) let me tell you that the Leap 2 costs between $3200 for the base model and up to $5000 for the enterprise model, which gives you a better viewpoint.