[burkaman]

I think it's clearly not ready for anything like the adoption levels of consoles, but people who own VR products definitely use them. It's too expensive, too low resolution, and too clunky to conquer the world yet, but it's an excellent first generation.

What you're describing sounds more like AR to me. Everyone I know who bought Google Glass showed it off to their friends and then never used it again. I know AR has obviously improved since then, but VR seems to be the more proven technology.

[AJ007]

The interesting thing is consoles aren't even the "big" market for games, mobile is. VR could hop past the console market size pretty quickly - though I suspect general media consumption may surpass the game use. (Gaming may win from a $ standpoint.)

Magic Leap is certainly promising, and a more plausible iteration of mass AR than Google Glass. The final form factor on that isn't clear.

I had the Dk1 and Dk2, and they both ended up in the closet largely because I don't have time for the game stuff. The Dk1 was especially hard to use and if you didn't get motion sickness you were really super human.

The right questions to ask about VR aren't what the current or next gen can and can't do, or that if it's prices too high (seriously, the iPhone6 was like what $2 million of processing power in 1995? Not to mention things that were impossible.)

The right question is do consumers want fully immersive media with sensory depravation to the outside world, or do they want some sort of Heads up display? Secondly, some motion sickness issues in VR may not be solvable, like what happens when you are riding in a moving car?

[burkaman]

Well I would call DK1 and 2 more of the 0th generation. The Vive is good enough for regular use, and from what I hear the released Rift is too.

Motion sickness I think will become less of a problem as developers get better, and people just get used to VR. You don't have to be superhuman to have no problem with the current headsets.

And yes, for entertainment, people want fully immersive media. Not for all applications, but it has high appeal for games and other pure entertainment.

> I don't have time for the game stuff.

Well, ok. I guess an xbox would end up in your closet too, then.

[partiallypro]

I wouldn't consider Google Glass to be real "AR", but just a small HUD, it doesn't really map your environment. I'd consider Hololens true AR, it too has a long way to go, but as I said businesses can fill the void between now and then...with VR, what use does it have in business? I would argue very little to none.

[burkaman]

I don't know how successful VR will be in business, but I think that's sort of tangential to this discussion. I am convinced it will be very successful as an entertainment product. Some companies have been experimenting with VR apartment tours, room planning, architecture demos, etc. Not sure how successful those will be.

I agree that Hololens is closer to "true" AR. That's why I said VR is more ready for public consumption, because you can go out and by a Vive right now, and it works great. Hololens isn't out and might not be out for a while, and it's not clear how well it actually works right now.

[ewzimm]

You can actually buy a working HoloLens right now! Limited release though.

https://www.microsoft.com/microsoft-hololens