[vFunct]

Did not know HoloLens had 23megapixel displays to show high resolution text for coding. It must have been really useful back then with such a high resolution display that you could use for coding all day.

People really need to understand that its the details that make a product viable, not the concept.

[numpad0]

HoloLens 2 had higher pixel density than AVP at 2K horizontal resolution at 43deg HFOV. So yeah, you just didn't know HoloLens had 23megapixel displays to show high resolution text for coding, nearly a decade ago.

The problem was the same as today. Dead numb market response to non-SteamVR VR/MR/AR/XR headsets.

[vFunct]

HoloLens 1: 1280 x 720 (per eye)

HoloLens 2: 2048 x 1080 (per eye)

Vision Pro: 3660 x 3200 (per eye)

Yah no one was gonna buy HoloLens as a desktop monitor replacement. It really was a crap product.

People ARE using Vision Pro as a desktop monitor replacement.

[numpad0]

> People ARE using Vision Pro as a desktop monitor replacement.

So do people with other headsets. AVP's uniqueness is that it's apparently useless for anything else whatsoever.

[nomel]

HoloLens 1 had nearly 40% higher PPD (47) than Apple Vision Pro (34).

[vFunct]

So you're saying HoloLens had a tiny field-of-view because of its limited resolution?

[nomel]

Sure, but that PPD number is what prevents me from using these headsets as a primary display replacement. I personally don't need a virtual display that fills 100 degrees of my vision and would happily sacrifice FOV for something usable.

This is from someone who has spent hundreds of hours coding in VR, which currently requires big font sizes and screens that take up massive FOV, which I find very uncomfortable for extended periods.