[soylentcola]

I think both FOV and price point are the most likely weak points to see continuing incremental improvements. Thinking back to my first smartphones in 2003-2004, it would've been easy to say "well yeah, the screens are too small, there's not enough RAM, and they're way too expensive!"

But over time, the steady improvement of touch displays, SoC's, and supply chains brought sub-$400 devices that are likely more powerful than my desktop PC at the time.

I think they made a reasonable compromise between FOV and ergonomics based on the current state of available hardware tech. While UI and software applications remain to be developed to make use of the tech, I'd be the least concerned about things like FOV going forward. It seems like a tradeoff that was made to avoid the bundles of tether cables and high-powered host machines seen in much of the current VR space.

[TheHoloHerald]

100% correct. First off as someone who uses the HoloLens daily FOV becomes less and less of an issue. People have to realize with FOV that it's a happy medium, most tech is about compromise and they did a great job with the hololens. Let's say they decided to add a wider FOV, they would have to add more glass, more processing power, longer battery life, more R&D, all of these things add up to a greater price, a heavier system and later release date. It's about equalibrium.

[Gaessaki]

I feel the same way. Not being tethered imo is a fantastic benefit that I aught to have mentioned. I don't really feel that FOV is a huge issue or anything, was just putting it out there.

Will be interesting to see where things go given they've switched suppliers for key parts supposedly in preparation for a 2019 release.