[wpietri]

I am saying that 3D products have a history of creating a "wow, this is so amazing" effect that creates a lot of excitement but no lasting value. My concern isn't really with 3D, but mistaking novelty for utility.

People also thought stereoscopic photos were the "new medium going forward", so linking to somebody amazed about a novel experience doesn't change my mind. It's another example of exactly how I think people shouldn't make this decision.

What will make the difference for me is not yet another person being amazed, but people using VR gear on a daily basis for something after the novelty wears off. At this point I have asked an awful lot of VR partisans for examples of that sort of usage, but so far nobody has offered anything substantial.

I hope one day it will get there, but until it does, I personally wouldn't bet much on it.

[syngrog66]

the utility/superiority of 3D/VR over 2D is a lot like the utility/superiority of GUI over CLI/text. at first, the former appears superior. certainly to newbs and casuals. but the vast majority of real work, true work by smart folks, occurs by folks focused on the latter. It's not that there are no niches and no use cases where the former is better, it's that the vast majority of truly necessary cases are best handled by the latter. the latter has an additional benefit/advantage that you can build the former atop the latter, if/when needed.

[wpietri]

That's a very interesting comparison.