While Palmer Luckey provided his own Magic Leap One headset to iFixit for their tear down, the founder of Oculus certainly had his chance for a proper review before the spudgers and screwdrivers came out, and he isn’t pulling any punches either. According to Luckey, the company’s much awaited AR headset is “a tragedy in the classical sense.”

Posting on his personal blog, Luckey is critical about the overall usability of the headset, calling it “less of a functional developer kit and more of a flashy hype vehicle that almost nobody can actually use in a meaningful way, and many of their design decisions seem to be driven by that reality.”

First the good, then the bad (as determined by Luckey).

Giving the Lightpack computing unit an “A+,” Luckey was fairly happy with the design decision to keep the guts of the computer off the user’s head, which could easily cause fatigue on neck muscles if the creators weren’t careful.

image courtesy Magic Leap

The robustness of the cables was also a positive point. While he admits Magic Leap should have made the battery replaceable, he maintains “nobody is going to use their ML1 long enough for that to matter to anyone but collectors with an aim to preserve the history of AR and VR.”

Biting. Prophetic. Very Palmer Luckey.

The “Tragic”

The headset, dubbed ‘Lightwear’, doesn’t use such a unique display system as previously touted by the company, Luckey says. As evidenced by the iFixit tear down, Lightwear uses a standard AR display technology called waveguides, which are then paired with reflective sequential-color LCOS displays and LED illumination. So Magic Leap One offers a few things more than HoloLens, but only just.

Captured by Road to VR, image courtesy Magic Leap

One of the headset’s goals was to solve the vergence-accommodation conflict, a fact of current mono-focal displays with fixed render distances. If you want to learn more about it, check out our primer here. To do this, Lightwear’s optics offers two focal planes, which doesn’t entirely solve the issue, Luckey says. “Mismatch occurs at all other depths. In much the same way, a broken clock displays the correct time twice a day.”

SEE ALSO
Magic Leap Headset Hits FCC Ahead of Confirmed Summer Launch

Tracking, image quality, and environmental meshing, or scanning the room for 3D geometry, are all acceptable, he says.

“Have you seen Hololens?  Think that, but with slightly larger FOV.  The rainbow artifacts are a bit worse owing to the large number of stacked waveguides and the black levels are a bit better, but Magic Leap is playing in the ballpark as everyone else. Despite drawing enough power to keep the headset nice and toasty (seriously, it is hard to touch the magnesium shell if you are in a warm room), the display is far too dim to use outdoors. That is a shame, since the transparency is about the same as a pair of dark sunglasses – not exactly indoor material.  How does the eye-tracking work?  Impossible to say, because nothing uses it. That is not a great indicator.”

Luckey mentions the system’s controller, dubbed ‘Control’, is plainly “bad,” and that it suffers from interference from ferrous materials like those often found in industrial environments.

Image courtesy FCC

The lack of click-able touchpad is also a sore spot for Luckey, as he raises doubts about precision UI-selection due to having to either tap the touchpad or use the trigger for selection, two movements that can cause you to miss your intended target. Counterbalances to Control’s magnetic transmitter, Luckey maintains, help give it a premium feel, but isn’t suited for long-term use due to the weightiness of the controller.

As for the operating system, called LuminOS, Luckey posits it “is actually just Android with custom stuff on top, the same approach most people take when they want to claim they have built a whole operating system.” The UI is dominated by flat windows, something he calls “some of the worst parts of phone UI slammed into some of the most gimmicky parts of VR UI, and I hope developers create better stuff in the near future.”

SEE ALSO
Magic Leap Takes on Funding from Media Company Axel Springer

Dev Kit or Expensive Prototype?

According to his own data gathering, Luckey estimates Magic Leap only sold around 2,000 units in the first week of sales, with “well under 3,000 units” as of this writing.

If true, this doesn’t bode well for the platform’s developers, as hardware adoption is somewhat of a self-fulfilling prophesy; if a company doesn’t motivate enough developers to create apps for a device, very few apps will exist and no one will buy the headset, meaning less developers are interested in the future and the platform essentially peters out as developers move on to more lucrative projects.

“Magic Leap needed to really blow people away to justify the last few years. The product they put out is reasonably solid, but is nowhere close to what they had hyped up, and has several flaws that prevent it from becoming a broadly useful tool for development of AR applications. That is not good for the XR industry.  It is slightly better than Hololens in some ways, slightly worse in others, and generally a small step past what was state of the art three years ago – this is more Hololens 1.1 than Consumer AR 1.0. Consumer AR can’t happen without advancement, and it seems those advancements will be coming from other companies. There is, of course, a chance that Magic Leap is sandbagging us; maybe the real deal is just behind the next curtain!  Past experience suggests otherwise…”

When it comes to revolution-launching developer kits, Luckey has some room to speak here. The Oculus Rift Developer Kit 1, the VR headset that started it all when it was released in 2013, only cost $300—a smidgen cheaper than Magic Leap One’s $2,300 price tag.

That said, Magic Leap still likely has enough funding to weather a less than resounding first product launch, although the true consumer generation offering will need to not only beat the upcoming the second gen HoloLens in terms of unique selling proposition, but also present a price-point that’s more accessible to early adopters looking to finally meet that big whale in the gymnasium—or at least a 4:3 window of it.

This article may contain affiliate links. If you click an affiliate link and buy a product we may receive a small commission which helps support the publication. See here for more information.


  • NooYawker

    I wonder if Magic Leap wasn’t so full of shit with the hype, would they even exist? Would they have gotten enough funding without the strong pitch? But now that they hyped their product and released this underwhelming device, will it survive? Either way the founders and pitch men of Magic Leap got rich.

    • Get Schwifty!

      Yep – welcome to the dark side of capitalism… it’s a real shame, imagine if that money had been up front used to fund current VR projects instead of this little hype boat….

      • Trenix

        Dark side of capitalism? No one forced anyone to fund anything. Let the people who have the money throw it around on innovation. If you lack money, invest into yourself, rather than someone else.

        • Zachary Scott Dickerson

          yeah, but the hype videos border on fraud, nothing like what was promised. I’m sure all that money went somewhere other than R&D.

          • Trenix

            If you didn’t put money into it, what do you care? Get out of other people’s wallets, damn.

          • Atheist Prophet

            I’m guessing those companies spending hundreds of millions of dollars investing in this got to see a bit more than the hype videos we saw.

            I read some interviews with early joiners, people that left their job to join Magic Leap and they all sorta said the same thing: ‘I was sceptic at first but then I got to try the prototype and I just said yes on the spot’.

            What I am thinking happened here: They have actual, revolutionary display tech. But it is monstrous in size (as in, can’t carry it because it’s too heavy) and miniaturization proved (too) difficult…. people were getting vocal about things taking too long so they decided to release a dev kit based on different display tech so they can buy some time and hopefully get some software development going.

            Also, I think they got a bit greedy. They want to define a platform here. All software via their store etc. The Apple model if you will. But they could have chosen to focus purely on the display tech and maybe partner with LG or Samsung on developing that.

        • brandon9271

          Yeah, more like “dark side of human nature.” Greed exists in capitalism, socialism, communism, etc. At least with capitalism you have a fighting chance to succeed.

          • Get Schwifty!

            Obviously, it’s a phrase….

          • Trenix

            Greed can exist in capitalism, only if customers allow it. You’re talking about crony capitalism, which is caused by governments that increase regulation, basically socialist, communist, and dictatorship governments.

        • Get Schwifty!

          As an ardent capitalist I will tell you it has its scummy side for certain, and these guys reek of it.

          DO NOT BE OFFENDED as little snowflakes when one points out an obvious truth…. running business frauds or sketch IS a dark side of capitalism…. just as yes, any human endeavor. My God….

          • Trenix

            You’re the one was offended, I just argued for capitalism. Learn to use the word correctly, snowflake.

      • Butler Reynolds

        Well, hat’s how it works. If you follow hype and invest in bad ideas, you don’t get a return on your money. Contrary to popular belief, the market, left to its own, is a failure machine. Unlike other -isms, it rewards success and punishes failure.

        • Get Schwifty!

          You are ignoring the potential play for out right fraud though…. there are good ideas, bad ideas and they all compete, then there are good ideas that are just fraudulent… make the distinction.

          • Atheist Prophet

            Fraud however is not a part of capitalism. It’s the part that is outside of capitalism. Free market does not mean free as in no rules, it means free to enter (so everyone can trade).

            Fraud is people breaking the rules that govern the market. It’s like saying soccer is not a fair sport because some players break the rules and use violence against their opponent.

    • Lucidfeuer

      No, they wouldn’t.

  • MW

    Ehhh… Dreams, smoke and mirrors. VR community should be more critical over all. Dreams are good, but in moderation, especially when we talking about new and expensive tech. Incredible hype around every thing related to VR (existing only in dreams of backers final version Pimax 8k for ex.) makes more damage than good.

    • Dave

      What a poor statement to make on a VR based website. Do you even own a VR headset? In general terms this is simply not true!!! Of course AR has a long way to go, we really didn’t need Magic Leap One to figure that out, I’m guessing the expectation was more in hope than anything else…

      There is a massive difference between AR and VR. Ever since I tried the hololens earlier this year I realised AR is massively behind VR in terms of commerical viability and being consumer ready. VR is here and it’s producing results today. ‘VR is smoke and mirrors’!?! – about 1000 hours of my own experiences with my Rift would beg to differ.

      • MW

        Thank you. You are perfect representation:) I insult you beliefs, so you have to crucify me, insult me, and basically scream like child.

        You wrong (i know you will not apologize) – I have Rift since 2 years, and Samsung HMD. Also I’m in IT hardware business for many years. And I’m a old gamer (since late 80’s). And my friends are gamers also. I know what I’m talking about.

        Poor statement to make on a VR based website”:) LOL. Please. Those BIG NEWS about simple games, and rumors, are better? Iread RoadToVR because I’m passionate about VR, but I’m realist, not a dreamer. I I’m not a teen anymore. So sorry, but I still think you wrong. VR is not here – just a preview of possibilities of VR. Same with AR. And people can dream, but when it comes to pay real money – and aggressive sales, unjustified high prices, and lying (VR business sins) there should be a place for criticism, not blind fanboyism and faith.

        Believe me – companies (google, Samsung, HTC, Facebook, Nvidia, AMD etc.) – are not your friends. Those are vicious machines created to make money. They have deep in their butt your dreams and expectations, as long as they can make more money.

        • Jim Cherry

          Some companies are less money making machines and more money making algorithms.

          • MW

            You talking about some people – and you right. I’m taking about corporation – and I’m also right. Corporation will be delaying technology if there’s profit. That’s their job.

        • Zachary Scott Dickerson

          meh, sort of agree. VR is not quite mainstream ready, but I’ve been having tons of fun, so doesn’t really bother me that AAA hasn’t caught on yet. It will eventually, but it’s much closer that AR (only tried hololens).

          • MW

            Great. Many people have fun from many different things. But mass market has it own laws. And for now VR is loosing in the battle (deadly mix of insufficient hardware and affordability). And companies are choking development – by high prices and milking old tech for years. We should have hmd with better resolution 2 years ago.

          • Zachary Scott Dickerson

            Well, I thought PSVR was doing quite well. not sure about PC world with video card prices through the roof. Not flourishing like I thought it would though. VR will persist though… if not it gaming, then other media formats.

  • Doctor Bambi

    I’d love to see someone stress test the controller and eye tracking components of this device, as those are really the main advances of this headset over Hololens. If they work well, it adds a lot of value to the potential interaction model, but I’m afraid they were essentially tacked on components designed to give the headset more curb appeal after they had to turn away from their original display technology which was really supposed to be the ‘magic’ of Magic Leap.

    • I couldn’t agree more. As mentioned on my own show, I know what magnets can do to magnetometer which are only 2D devices, adding a Z-axis requires a well calibrated receiver that is easily influenced by other magnetic fields. Worse, you can affect the receiver semi-permanently if you place a strong magnetic force on it or near by. Plus, as Tested mentioned in their own review, the controller tracking had noticeable jitter which frustrates me already with much more stable 3DOF and light based tracking systems to highlight or select an object without having to get right up to it.

  • dk

    he also said “The product they put out is reasonably solid” but because of the masive hype and flaws as a whole it won’t be great for the industry
    ….but meh I’m not so sure about it…..it could be neutral or even it could be somewhat positive

  • Ellon Musk

    VR/AR desperately needs the metalens. Desperately doesn’t even say it enough. It will put all display related issues to bed. YES, no screen door effect at low 2-4k resolutions, no blur or the need for the “sweet spot,” foveated rending will work at ease, I even think it will reduce motion sickness(a large part for me is caused because everything is so blurry, out of focus, and I feel like I’m drunk trying to move or ride.) Imagine how much weight will be reduced taking off the big bulky glass lenses. A vive pro with the metalens will allow it to go mainstream successfully for the next 3-4 years until hardware catches up to increase display resolution. I hope Facebook or HTC reads this. Heck even pimax. What are you waiting for?

    • Bryan Ischo

      Wishful thinking, Mr. Musk. That technology is nowhere near mature enough for a consumer product, for a whole variety of reasons. We can wish and hope that someone will make a major breakthrough and solve these problems overnight, but the more likely reality is the slow march of progress over a decade or more.

      • Jim Cherry

        The meta lense doesnt exist and the real ellon musk hasnt invested in vr or ar.

        • Bryan Ischo

          Tell me something I don’t know.

          Also the “real” name is “Elon Musk”, one “ell”.

          • JJ

            Also the “real” name is “Jim Carrey”, one “Car”.

          • Ellon Musk

            no, my name is Ellon with two L’s

      • Ellon Musk

        with the $billion investments made in pointless incremental upgrades to VR, Magic Leap being a great example, R&D should be focused into something more game-changing such as the lens. the breakthroughs are sufficient to be used at a product, however, not entirely as a consumer product just yet. With sufficient R&D diverted specifically into VR use cases, this could easily be done within the next 1-3 years.

  • jeff courtney

    Palmer released the oculus 1 and dk2 off of kickstarter and proved to bring home on promise.The backers received undelayed products.Me a purchaser of the dk2 was happy with the price which was affordable and came in a timely manner.Great customer service.The product proved to be beyond my expectations too.Lets admit this without palmer and oculus we wouldnt have competitors like google,vive or psvr.Praise Jesus!

    • kuhpunkt

      Why wouldn’t we have the Vive?

      • Get Schwifty!

        There was no serious VR push from HTC/Valve at that point at least not as intense. No question the buzz around Oculus pushed them to get involved.

        • kuhpunkt

          Maybe just not in the public eye. What Valve had done led Zuckerberg to buy Oculus. So without Valve Oculus might not have become as big as it is now.

    • NooYawker

      What bullshit. The Vive would have been released with or without Palmer. Without John Carmack Plamers Kickstarter might have flopped like 99% of all tech kickstarter campaigns.

      • Except John wouldn’t have gotten involved if he didn’t believe in what Lucky was doing. Lucky can be infectious in his attitude towards VR. Sure every great product is made of up of many talented people, but someone has to light the flame.

        • NooYawker

          Carmack would have found an outlet. He was working on VR software while working at Bethesda. How could anyone think the Vive wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for the oculus?

          • Andrew Jakobs

            because it was Oculus who brought attention to VR again with their promise of a cheap headset. THAT made other companies turn their head (what? can you make something like that for cheap? and people are very interested in it? ok, let’s look around and see if we can do it too as we’ve already got the manufacturing plants)..

          • NooYawker

            You are going by the assumption Valve was not working on a VR headset and sensors. Not every company announces everything they do years before they do it.

          • Get Schwifty!

            They _were_ fiddling with it, but as far as anyone can tell, they had no serious plans to release anything, it was more of a sort of DARPA type question at that point. If they really _were_ that serious on their own they would be making different moves even now, they mostly appear to be reactionary in many ways “going with what we’ve got” more than anything else.

          • ummm…

            so are you saying that valve went to market with a COMPLETE room scale ecosystem BEFORE oculus because they are smarter and work faster, or because they started around the same time?

          • NooYawker

            They’re saying Valve saw the kickstarter campaign then built and designed a VR headset, sensors and touch controllers just like that. Sound crazy? Of course it does, because it is. It’s difficult for some people to comprehend how Valve works. Quietly without a stream of PR campaigns announcing every time one of their developers take a shit.

          • Atheist Prophet

            No, they are saying that Valve decided to turn research into development because they saw Oculus success.

            Edit: Also, did you notice how quickly Sony announced PSVR? Do you really believe Sony did zero investigation into VR before Oculus? Or is it far more plausible that when Oculus was succesful, they took one of their research projects out of the closet, dusted it off and set the hype train for PSVR in motion based on that? Again, I don’t believe for a moment that PSVR would be with us today if it hadn’t been for Palmer Luckey.

          • Valve was already collaborating with people from the University of Washington, Human Interface Technology Lab many years before then.

          • Atheist Prophet

            You can capitalize ‘complete’ as much as you want but I am not so big on the whole ‘room scale omg!’ hype. Who actually has 4 x 4 m space in his room for this stuff??

            If you want VR in the mass market you have to build a value proposition for a large enough user base. I agree with Luckey that that means a seated VR experience playing more or less traditional games in a VR environment. Room scale requires big changes to the game mechanics as far as movement is concerned and from what I read it does not suit many mainstream games. Not to say there won’t be games that work very well with teleport, but people want to play Fortnite et al in VR.

          • ummm…

            I’m only answering to be kind. I appreciate your enthusiasm. Your comments really are too ridiculous to be responded too because I have neither the patience or the inclination to attempt to figure out if you are a troll or incapable of reason.

          • Caven

            People tend to focus on roomscale, when the real benefit is 360-degree support. Having room scale doesn’t prevent me from enjoying standing or seated experiences. I can play Heart of the Emberstone or Windlands without having to snap-turn, and can then sit down and play Project Cars or Hellblade: Senua’s Sacrifice. You don’t need to have a large playspace to be freed from being limited to forward-facing experiences only. Sure, Oculus can do 360-degrees just fine these days, but I’d argue it requires a more difficult setup since the sensors have to be connected to the computer.

          • And, that’s why that type of VR will not enter the mainstream for awhile. My bets are on the portable VR and AR devices. They will catch on to mainstream before the VR caves become something to consider for a home entertainment system.

          • NooYawker

            Again, completely baseless wild assumptions. Valve is a private company, unlike Magic Leap and FB they don’t announce everything they do.

            No one can claim they have a single clue what Valve’s intention were with their VR research. Valve forwent it’s royalties so other companies can build their own products. The only reason you’ll see many more choices in the next couple of years is because of Valve sharing their tech with everyone.

            Exactly what is reactionary on Valve’s part?

          • Atheist Prophet

            I just have to respond to this.

            Steam was brilliant ok. Let’s start with that. And it made Valve a ton of money. But to me, it’s pretty obvious that they lack vision and don’t really know where to go from here.

            They have launched a console, Steam Box. How well is that doing? Not so good. Launching a console is big! You can’t just launch some hardware and hope it will work out. It won’t. If you want a place among the big 3 you will need to invest in it as big or bigger than they are doing.

            Same with the Valve. Partnering with HTC is smart in one sense, as Valve does not have the manufacturing capability of HTC. But at the same time I literally cannot name a single game console that was made by a pure hardware company that ever was successful. I can remember the 3DO was a console that tried that. Philips tried something like that with CDi. But that all flopped. Why? Because you need a whole ecosystem with software and services around it that is much more difficult to grow if the platform is owned by multiple owners. What is HTC doing to promote VR?

            From the news I have seen in those days, it was pretty clear that it was Oculus huge success with the Kickstarter campaign and all the hype surrounding that that really sparked Valve’s interest in actually launching this. And frankly the stories on how this kid basically stole their tech is pretty sad imho. Even if it were true, which I don’t believe for one second.

          • jimmey dean hiya

            even if it were true?
            palmer owed 50 million in the judgement against him.
            it is true.

          • Andrew Jakobs

            They were working on it as an internal hobby project, at that point not yet with the idea of releasing it anytime soon.

          • ummm…

            as we already have the manufacturing plants, invested heavily in RD, hired a team, made partnerships with hardware suppliers.

          • Get Schwifty!

            I think what they are saying is it was a sort of side research hobby thing, without serious developmental effort going on nor a priority for HTC/Valve. That all changed when Palmer started making waves and generating interest about it (along with Carmack).

          • ummm…

            and yet palmer and facebook couldnt beat valve to launch a full product.

          • NooYawker

            Let’s be real, you are literally making things up. Valve’s VR research was a side hobby?? Seriously, give me one source or even a hint that this is based on anything but your own imagination.

        • My reply was not intended to be a Oculus against Steam. But the timeline indicates that many saw the interest and put engineering efforts and money behind it. The fact VR is not new and a eMagin had the Z800 in 2003 that you could buy for $800, showed that it was already feasible to make a reasonably affordably stereo paired AMOLED screens with IMU that you hook to your computer. Having owned one, it was pretty cool but it was a niche market. There was also attempts to turn your phone into a stereo viewer, some with a 360 view for the early iPhones. Again, a niche market because the screen was so small. It only aligned when we started seeing larger display panels that could support higher refresh rates. There is a reason that both share similar IMUs, screen technology and lens technology — it is what was out there to work with at the time. Now we are starting to see forks as new research is being applied and seed money available.

          • Yes, we all remember QuicktimeVR right ?! VRML ? JavaVR ?

        • Well, anybody would become infectious with millions of dollars sitting under their ass. There are so many other VR pioneers that contributed more to VR than Palmer ever will. He just got lucky. All he did was copy and make a VR device from torn apart tech he had laying around his garage. lol

          • I am not fan of Palmer, and yes VR had been around before he was born, but as you said, he took existing off-the-shelf components along with software based anti-lens distortion functions and created a much more immersive experience than what was available in the past and offered it as the DK1 for $300-$400 on Kickstarter. Many, including myself felt we got our monies worth and looked forward to further improvements.

            Unlike Magic Leap, who used deceptive marketing to sell the public on a product that is no where near the quality and potential they claimed, and to many, myself included, it probably won’t be anytime soon based on their patents. It should also be noted that spending $2500, for many is out of reach, which will leave many creative developers in the wind, unless Magic Leap takes page out of Microsoft’s handbook and starts giving them to educational institutions & those with great ideas for content. Sadly, playing simple games, viewing 3D comic books and viewing the web is something I don’t want to spend $2500 on.

      • Andrew Jakobs

        No, the vive would NOT have been released, as valve didn’t have any plans to commercialize their VR tech for a long time, not until Oculus presented their project to the public to great enthousasm of the public, which made others also interested. And yes, maybe without Carmack’s involvement it would have flopped, but he got involved and it didn’t flop. Let’s not forget Carmack was also creating his own headsets.

        • NooYawker

          You have no grounds to make that assumption that Valve would not have released their product for a long time. Valve rarely releases any information on anything they’re doing.

          • Get Schwifty!

            I would have to spend more time than I care to, but if you dig through various inside quotes by people including Carmack, etc. before even Oculus came about it was obvious they were considering it as a very long term proposition, not one as soon, Oculus just pushed the schedule up.

            https://www.engadget.com/2016/03/18/htc-vive-an-oral-history/

          • ummm…

            and yet they released their product sooner.

          • Get Schwifty!

            That doesn’t prove anything in and of itself, companies can arbitrarily release unfinished or unpolished products to get to market first.

          • ummm…

            oculus released an unfinished product. valve released a finished product, sooner. yet, you are fine with stating that oculus was the catalyst for the whole vr surge – disregarding yates comments – and this entails that either oculus took longer to make an unfinished product.

          • Get Schwifty!

            I’m not getting into another inane Vive vs. Oculus discussion with you, I am not even sure why you are interjecting here it’s pretty obvious Vive was partially pushed to market to get in ahead, the poor controller design was part of it. You are clearly referencing the room scale which Oculus was not attempting to do on its first release, no secret there.

          • ummm…

            im sorry…..what about the roomscale lighthouse solution. plus, the oculus controls are CERTAINLY nice – but the wands are not bad. i have no complaint to be honest. you should try them for different programs that a wand makes sense with. you are trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. you are the one debating that oculus started it all, it was all oculus tech, and everyone jumped in only because oculus made it possible. who is more ridiculous? me for saying the obvious?

          • David D. Taylor

            What makes it finished? Oculus without touch controllers felt more finished than the vive with room scale. Vive still feels like a dev kit… I have both, fyi… The work that both Oculus and Valve/HTC has done have been important to the industry. I don’t think anyone is saying that Valve wasn’t messing around with VR. The comments are it appears we wouldn’t be as far along if Oculus hadn’t have made a splash when it did.

          • ummm…

            admittedly i bought my vive at launch after hearing of the oculus. i should say, i heard of the oculus – late – a few months before release……did some research…….bought the vive. so there is truth to that late term marketing push, but at the same time i BOUGHT A VIVE and it was hands down the better one at launch, and still arguably so now if you think about it.

            anyhow, the point most people are talking is the yates comment that clearly states, and wasn’t refuted by anybody, that valve put their kit into the oculus labs and a lot of that tech was taken, as well as from carmach on the other end, and used in the oculus minus the lenses, the room scale solution and the controllers. the room scale solution is inferior in the oculus, and there is no point in saying otherwise. the touch controllers are great, but the wand isn’t useless – and both lenses have pros and cons. there are things that the oculus is better at ie the weight, previously the headstrap, etc etc. this isn’t to say the oculus is bad AT ALL. but what we are talking about is their state years ago not right now.

          • NooYawker

            Oculus without touch controllers or room scale felt more finished than the Vive?? So you’re saying oculus users who were sitting in front of their computer with a xbox controller was better than Vive users who had touch controllers walking around the room??
            Is that what you’re actually saying?
            Saying we wouldn’t be as far along if it wasn’t for Oculus is a fair statement, but that’s not what these people are saying. They’re saying the Vive wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for Lucky. These are two very different statements.

          • Atheist Prophet

            “Saying we wouldn’t be as far along if it wasn’t for Oculus is a fair statement”

            Ok so let’s back off of Valve for a moment and focus on Sony. So not too long after it became clear VR was turning into a hype, Sony announced PSVR. And it seemed they actually already had hardware and everything. How could they have done that so fast?

            I’d be willing to bet money that Sony actually already had a VR research project. But I’m willing to bet even more that without Oculus it would never have seen the light of day. We would not have had PSVR. It would *maybe* have appeared for PS5 but I doubt even that.

            The firms that are doing well (and Valve is/was such a firm, just like Sony) are usually not in a hurry to innovate and change the market. Why change if you are winning right?!? But they are very paranoid at being overtaken by a competitor so if they feel that might happen they throw everything they have at it to make sure they keep up. This is what makes them reactionary.

          • NooYawker

            Valve does not operate like any other company.. anywhere! If they did we would be playing Half-Life XX right now. Yet we don’t even have HL3 yet. But they did release a steam machine, steam link, steam controller, and any other thing they felt like making. Or maybe they wouldn’t have released the VR until they made a full VR game. The bottom line is no one outside of Valve has any idea what their plans were for VR.

          • Atheist Prophet

            “Valve does not operate like any other company.”

            Bias confirmed.

          • NooYawker

            Your bias is confirmed. Try refuting the fact Valve operates differently. They’re privately held.

          • Atheist Prophet

            “you are fine with stating that oculus was the catalyst for the whole vr surge”

            Because it obviously was. Just check the headlines a few years back man.

          • ummm…

            ah thats right, if it didnt happen in the headlines, then it didnt happen. IM NOT TALKING ABOUT PRESS HERE. how can you say that when everyone knows about the vive room, and what would have come before that. im not saying the rift owes everything to the vive. grow up.

          • David D. Taylor

            If anything, the fact that they released an expensive product that was not consumer friendly and very unintuitive, makes it seem like they put out a product that was not completely finished, but one they wanted to get out first. It still supports the idea that Oculus pushed Vive to release sooner rather than later. When you look at Oculus, from the get go, even without touch controllers, the headset was much easier to use, had better content, and was overall much more of a consumer product in comparison to vive, which was more of an enthusiast product… and still is more of an enthusiast product… Then the touch controllers launched and continued that trend of slow and steady wins the race.

          • ummm…

            i preordered my vive. i had just heard about vr a few months previous. i had a friend build me a tower. i have never built a tower. i am just a regular 34 year old that has had computers since the early 90s. i installed it just fine with a little bit of troubleshooting. that is computers. this isn’t a console. the oculus had similar teething issues and still do. vr isn’t and was never for casual users…..pretending like oculus has the leg up if your grandma tried to install it is disingenous.

          • NooYawker

            Not consumer friendly and unintuitive?? Exactly what made the Vive more difficult to use? You post is utter nonsense. There are many people who own both that prefer the Vive and vice versa.
            If you prefer the oculus that’s fine, to make a ridiculous statement that it’s not consumer friendly is just silly.

          • brandon9271

            Consumer product, yes, but you can’t ignore the fact that the Rift Kickstarter happened 4 years before that and people had Dk1 and dk2 for years before anything else came. The Vive was a response to the Rift.

          • ummm…

            Oh for sure . I won’t say that valve started after….and we all know the history of valve installing their product at oculus, but Palmer sure got a lot of eyes looking when he launched that Kickstarter. I wonder tho, how many vr projects where funded before and after oculus. Are we giving credit for merely a popular kicksaterter or are we giving credit for vision and competency?

          • NooYawker

            Pushing the schedule up is most likely true, I don’t debate that. Saying the Vive wouldn’t exist is what I’m debating.

            It might also be true the Vive made it possible for the Rift to be what it is today.

            https://www.roadtovr.com/alan-yates-rift-is-direct-copy-of-valves-vr-research/

          • Atheist Prophet

            “Oculus just pushed the schedule up.”

            Yep. From low priority research project for ‘the future’ to ‘top priority must release asap’.

        • ummm…

          how does valve make it to market with a full ecosystem quicker than oculus?

          • Andrew Jakobs

            Because they used the Oculus development kits for developing their SteamVR? and Valve already had a big market so adding VR games/sections wasn’t a big problem. And it wasn’t valve who manufactured the vive, it was HTC, and they already had big manufactering plants and experience designing/manufacturing consumer grade products..

          • ummm…

            omg andrew this is the response. it is so misleading, contradictory and wrong that i wont even respond. you really dont know what reason is do you – when you have a bias.

          • Andrew Jakobs

            what bias do I have according to you? Valve used the Oculus DK’s to publicly test SteamVR, it was also the first ‘officially’ supported headsets.

          • ummm…

            listen bro. i always see you in the comment thread. for some reason i think you do have some good points. but im justing letting you know that you have a clear bias. i have a vive, but im not fan boy. some of the things you say are very misleading and self serving. have a good one man.

          • Andrew Jakobs

            I don’t have a bias, we also have a Vive, which IMHO certainly has the best/easiest tracking. But the story of Oculus/HTC/Valve is well written in the following engadget article (there it’s clearly written they had no intention of producing their own hardware (back then)):
            https://www.engadget.com/2016/03/18/htc-vive-an-oral-history/

            I’m glad Valve partnered up with HTC and produced the excellent Vive. I still think Oculus should just ditch their constellation tracking system and go for Lighthouse tracking, it’s just so much easier for consumers to work with that system (until we actually get controllers that have excellent inside-out tracking, and the inside-out tracking of the headsets improve even more). I’m not fond of the Oculus tracking system as it requires just too much from your PC (in resources and especially in USB-ports).

          • ummm…

            thx for the article. ill read it.

          • Steam Lighthouse tracking is part of the higher cost of Vive VR system, but I do agree that they should change to one consistent outside/in tracking system. However, I don’t agree with your assessment with inside/out tracking found in MS WMRs. I have never have any problems with tracking with my Odyssey, other than the controllers once in awhile. In playing Arizona Sunshine on my $800 budget VR backpack with GTX1050tI , I found it was as immersive as my much faster desktop system with a GTX1070ti & HTC/Vive. Having no cables helps, which is I why I am in a virtual line to pre-order the Vive Wireless system.

          • Atheist Prophet

            “im justing letting you know that you have a clear bias.”

            Actually, I fully agree with him, based on news coverage. There was ZERO coming out of Valve about VR before Oculus. Then Oculus happens and suddenly they release a headset. Come on.

          • ummm…

            Dude, valve announces when it’s ready. Nobody is debating oculus went to press and created more buzz sooner. Wow dude. Dense man. Dense.

            This is about rnd.

          • Atheist Prophet

            Seems to me you are the one with a bias. To outsiders it is very clear that Valve had a huge lead in the games market overall, that it could leverage to quickly muscle it’s way into the emerging VR market. Just as Sony very quickly had both hardware and an ecosystem. These are big companies with big wallets that can muscle their way into a market if they want to.

          • ummm…

            vive room at oculus hq. clearly things were happening between both companies before headlines.

          • Atheist Prophet

            Because… Steam??

            I mean come on. Valve is a big publisher raking in millions. Oculus a startup with zero history, only a big budget, which Valve also has. Also, Oculus was taking it’s time, trying to improve the tech. That might have been a mistake but they underestimated how fast others would catch up I think.

          • ummm…

            Oculus is a start up……..right here. I’m done.

          • Atheist Prophet

            Psss. Oculus *is* a startup when it comes to games. And so is Facebook for that matter. And so was Sony when they launched the Playstation (1).

            You can play word games if you like. But Valve clearly had a head start in the games market compared to Oculus. They are a very influential player in that market.

        • NooYawker

          You know nothing. You act like you have inside information. Do you anything to back up what your saying?

      • tomer gilron

        They wouldn`t have go to VR without the hype the Rift made.
        So, most likely not.

        • ummm…

          citation?

          • Atheist Prophet

            observation. It’s pretty plain to see if you have been following game development / tech news for multiple decades. Also, look at PSVR. Exactly the same thing as with Valve. Or Hololens for that matter. Is it really a coincidence all these products were announced during the hype days of Oculus? All these companies were afraid to miss the hype train.

          • ummm…

            It’s hard to reconcile your fantasy land with the actual r and d / press communications that occurred. You think a kickstarter was the beginning. Talk about not paying attention for decades. And not paying attention now.

          • Atheist Prophet

            Yeah I have been missing a lot I guess. What with Vive being announced before we ever heard of the Rift and all. Could you maybe point me to some articles so I can learn?

          • ummm…

            wow press announcements are now part of r&d and business to business relationships. ok. i think you are trying to fight an argument im not making. im not saying one is better than the other.

      • That is so true. It was Carmacks endorsement that got the attention. Palmer was just another garage tinkerer, there were lots of them developing VR back then. Palmer just got lucky.

    • I have been very happy with Oculus, except when they cut off their Note 7 support right in the middle of my project. The Go redeemed them and looking forward to the Santa Cruz.

      • Caven

        Unless they managed to do that before the Note 7 battery failures became big news, I don’t think I can blame them for not wanting to support a device that would have had a higher than normal risk of combusting while it’s in front of the user’s face.

    • R FC

      Alan Yates (Valve) might disagree:-

      “Every core feature of both the Rift and Vive HMDs are directly derived from Valve’s research program. Oculus has their own [camera-based] tracking implementation and frensel lens design but the CV1 is otherwise a direct copy of the architecture of the 1080p Steam Sight prototype Valve lent Oculus when we installed a copy of the “Valve Room” at their headquarters. I would call Oculus the first SteamVR licensee, but history will likely record a somewhat different term for it.”

      • JJ

        yupp lol they backwards engineered the shit out of that. Bad on Valve to lend Oculus tech and trust them not to rip them off. but hey thats what FB does

        • R FC

          From what i’ve read it was that installation that convinced Mark Zuckerberg to invest in Oculus?

        • WyrdestGeek

          “You took our stuff, you changed it, and you called it your own.” — Pirates of Silicon Valley

        • David D. Taylor

          FB wasn’t involved at that time, if I remember correctly. Your bias is showing, JJ…

      • Andrew Jakobs

        But then again, valve’s research wasn’t really original anyway, I have a book laying around from the 90’s which describes almost the same techniques as used by the current headsets (but ofcourse with older display’s).. Also Carmack had his own research on headsets before he joined Oculus. Valve wasn’t the only one doing VR tech, a lot of internet hobbyists also were doing it. And it all comes down to the same thing..

        • Even Wikipedia has it all wrong. Their list of VR pioneers is a Joke. Boeing was dabbling in VR with Catia back in 80’s, before that Flight Simulators of the 50’s were the true VR pioneering days. It’s men like Thomas Furness III that deserve the bulk of the credit. Everybody else afterwards just back-engineered and used his and other VR pioneering research. The high resolution phone screens made it all possible for modern consumer based VR. I think we all know who to thank for that, and it’s really not Palmer, he just got lucky that Carmack picked him.

      • impurekind

        Palmer was doing most of the key stuff in his own garage without any Valve input back in the early days, and it was his push with that first Kickstarter version of the Rift more than anything that brought about the current VR revolution that is now upon us and in its early days.

        Sure, Valve was beavering away on some great VR tech, but Palmer deserves every single bit of credit he’s earned, and Oculus too for what it put together and achieved with the first consumer VR.

        And, look at the likes of Touch: Sure, Valve was working on hand controllers as well–and Oculus blow Vavle’s hand controllers out the water with the first consumer release version of Touch.

        Oculus launched with a better headset, a better user interface and store (far more user friendly and polished), with superior motion controllers, and at a better price (with a lot more included for that price too) than any VR products put out that were directly supported by Valve.

        To give Valve all the credit for what has been achieved with VR to date is a total joke.

        • ummm…

          all the credit?

        • NooYawker

          Who’s giving Valve all the credit. We’re saying Lucky doesn’t deserve all the credit.. that would be a total joke. Especially claiming the Vive wouldn’t exist if it wasn’t for him. That’s the joke.

        • R FC

          You make some good points that I agree with (especially about the Rift+Touch)

          My comment was not meant to discredit Mr. Palmer who is well recognised to have rekindled this latest wave of VR with his energetic development during the early days of Oculus and its kickstarter campaign. This was very heartening to those of us who have used VR during the early to mid 1990’s only to witness it fade into oblivion!

          However, the Steam Sight room that Valve installed at Oculus was used by Mark Zuckerberg and it was reported that his experience using the Valve supplied “roomscale” equipment cemented his decision to buy Oculus.

          This was fantastic, as it provided Oculus with the funding required to develop and manufacture the CV1 as we know it today, arguably the finest headset of this first generation, with further backing for desperately needed software applications.

          The work that Oculus has done since has also been groundbreaking and done a tremendous amount of accelerate development beyond what we expected during these early years.

          As an early Vive adopter, the lack of activity by Valve has been really disappointing, but not unexpected, considering their general ambivalence towards releasing content.

          From what I have read (former Valve developers tweeting), it was the exodus of VR team talent to Oculus that actually spurred Valve into action where otherwise their VR could have seen a similar fate to HL3, and been stuck in internal development.

          Still no sign of production release for Knuckles nor their 3 VR games….

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/cce65fd76c0884b75525acd981bc4c2b040f3f53bb60efef9d6d0632cccb7eec.png

        • Ben Bega

          > and at a better price (with a lot more included for that price too) than any VR products put out that were directly supported by Valve.

          I think its important to note that a roomscale-capable Rift with controllers was initially more expensive (880$ vs Vive’s 800$) and worked much worse. When Touch came out, roomscale was experimental for a long time and didnt work very well for a few months. The rift didnt have comparable roomscale tech for almost a year after the HMDs launched

          • impurekind

            Eh, Rift has never been more expensive than Vive for any setup that I’m aware of. It was a couple-few hundred dollars cheaper before Touch came out, and even with Touch and an extra sensor added it was still cheaper than Vive.

          • Ben Bega

            That is incorrect. When touch first came out, it was 600 for the HMD, 200 for the controllers and 1 sensor and 80$ for an extra sensor.

            It was 800$ for Rift/Touch and 2 sensors and 880$ for a 3 sensor setup.

            This is before they slashed their prices 6 months later

          • impurekind

            I can’t recall precisely so I can’t be bothered arguing the specifics. But, I’ll tell you this: The third sensor is not necessary for room scale, even if it is preferred, and with that bundle you also got around 8 free great games, an included Xbox One controller and a remote too, as well as the headset having built in speakers and a superior strap, which came as an additional cost on Vive. So, regardless of you’re trying to spin history to suit your personal choice, the Rift has always been and continues to be the much better all-round value proposition–and that isn’t really debatable.

          • Ben Bega

            Alright man, Ill bring out some dates for you. Oculus Touch released on December 6th. Oculus dropped its price in April to 500$. It was 880$ for a 3 sensor setup for 4 months (Dec-March). It was a while ago, so dont feel bad for forgetting the dates ;)

            Now onto your second paragraph. You claim that 3 sensors is not required for roomscale, but you are pretty wrong there. 2 sensors will be good enough for 360 degree tracking if you are standing in place, but if you want to do roomscale, it will leave a pretty significant number of dead spots. Not to mention that when Touch first came out, the tracking was pretty spotty and much, much worse than it currently is. For a while (I think it was the 1.11 patch), roomscale was completely broken and basically wouldnt work for anyone. At that point, even Oculus recommended 3 sensors to get decent 360 tracking and roomscale was still “experimental” and not supported. Currently, 3 sensors is still basically a requirement for roomscale. I know this because Im currently using a 2 sensor setup for development and cant get roomscale to work perfectly.

            Also, when they released the SKU with the touch controller/rift together, it no longer came with the Xbox controller. Also, half of the games you listed are just free in general, Vive/WMR users can use them too. The only real advantage the Rift had is the better stock headstrap, but even at that point, the Rift HMD still lacks other things that the Vive has (like a larger FOV, more god rays).

            Im definitely not trying to spin history and I have no agenda. I have DK2, 2 Rifts, a Vive, 2 Oculus Gos, an Acer WMR headset and am a member of the Oculus Start program. Ill probably have Santa Cruz by the end of the year and plan on getting the Pimax HMD whenever it releases for regular consumers. On top of that, I set up VR stations in schools and recommend the Rift about half the time.

            I have no beef with Oculus, I actually really like them. That doesnt change the fact that at one point, the Rift with roomscale capabilities was more expensive and worked worse than the Vive.

          • impurekind

            It was $800 for a Vive plus two motion controllers and two sensors.

            It was $800 for a Rift plus two motion controllers and two sensors . . . plus and extra Xbox One controller and a remote, and more and better officially included free games/experience.

            FACT–the Rift was (and still is) a better value proposition.

            End of debate.

            No, I’m 100% right that three sensors is not essential for room scale. Even Oculus official documentation states you can use two sensors for basic 360 room scale. Three is just the preferred option that offers improved room scale tracking. But even very early videos show clearly that the Rift, even with just one sensor, never mind two, was still pretty great a tracking the headset at “room scale”:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_HlXzELHgo&t=1s (room scale with one sensor)

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyNKR_-uKfs (again, room scale with one sensor)

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cXrJu-zOzm4 (room scale with two sensors)

            And, CLEARLY, it’s even better now with three sensors–although not essential.

            And, they did EVENTUALLY get rid of the included Xbox One controller, sadly imo, but you’re the one saying the Rift plus Touch was more expensive than Vive when it came out–and I’m the one calling out your utter bullsh*t fanboy spin.

          • Ben Bega

            Alrighty man, this is going to be my last comment since you are denser than a bowl of oatmeal.

            The videos you posted of the Rift tracking “room scale” with 1 sensor are pretty useless since the guy isnt using any controllers. If he had controllers, it wouldnt matter that he could lay on the floor because the controllers would be drifting half way to narnia. There is a reason that touch controllers require a minimum of 2 sensors.

            As for the third video you posted, it is an impressive demo, and like I said earlier, roomscale is technically possible with 2 sensors, just with a bunch of dead zones. Notice how there are zero obstructions in the room to cause any blind spots? Notice how the user keeps his arms up and in the open the whole time? If he tried to play any game where the controller had to come close to his body and he wasnt directly in line with both sensors, there would be some major drift. There is a reason why everyone on every forum will say 2 is doable for roomscale but 3 is what you want to get a set up on par with the Vive tracking.

            > Rift plus Touch was more expensive than Vive when it came out–and I’m the one calling out your utter bullsh*t fanboy spin.

            Let me make this clear then. At the time of touch releasing, the Rift basically required 3 sensors for any type of 360 tracking. Oculus said that 2 sensors would be great for 180 experiences but a third was recommended for anything more. This was in their blog post about tracking. At the time, the constellation tracking was still pretty lacking and users were discovering that it was hogging a ton of USB bandwidth so even with 3 sensors, tracking was still shoddy. Then, Oculus kept improving the tracking and got it to a good state, but roomscale was still labled experimental. Then, patch 1.11 hit and completely screwed tracking up. They eventually went on to revert this patch and subsequently start using a beta branch right after because it was so bad. Through all this, anyone who wanted roomscale was using a 3 sensor setup, which was 880$ total. Until April, the Vive was being recommended more since it had solid tracking and was 80$ cheaper. When the Rift price dropped, it became the price/performance king and sales really started picking up (especially with the 400$ summer sale that eventually became permanent).

            Im not sure why you get so butthurt to hear that for a few months, the Rift wasnt the best deal on the market. It clearly is now. Also not sure why you insist Im a fanboy when I own more Oculus products than anything and am in their developer program. Not to mention that everything Ive said so far is a fact.

            Also, I dont think Ive ever heard anyone claim that the god rays are the same on the Rift. Even the biggest Oculus fanboy (the famous Heaney) says that the Rift god rays are worse. Also, the Vive measurably has a larger FOV as Oculus chose to have a slightly clearer screen.

          • impurekind

            You’re spinning bullcrap, for whatever reasons, and I’m calling out your bullcrap so any readers don’t drink your insidious Kool-Aid.

            Also, you are an utter moron: They both cost $800 for the same basic setup (headset, two controllers and two sensors)–well, except Rift gave you so much more in that “same” setup as I have now covered multiple times (included earphones plus Xbox One controller plus remote plus more bundled free games/experiences)–you absolute tool.

            Are you ret*rded or something?

          • Ben Bega

            Im not though. Im stating facts. When touch launched, a 3 sensor setup was 880$. That is a fact. At this same time, the Vive was 800$. This is also a fact.

            The Vive was the better deal for a few months, even after touch came out, so it sold more units. Also a fact.

            When the Rift price dropped, Rift sales picked up and it started outselling the Vive. After a while, it passed the Vive on the steam hardware survey. Again, fact.

            You linked deceptive videos claiming the Rift could do roomscale with 1 sensor even though the controllers werent being used. Beyond a technical experiment, that accomplishes nothing. Again, fact.

            I am not a Vive fanboy, especially considering I recommend Rifts constantly and own many Oculus products. Fact.

            You arent calling anything out and instead are trying to make straw man arguments or attack me because you are mad for some reason.

          • impurekind

            Here’s some facts too:

            At launch the Rift with two Touch controllers, two sensors, an Xbox One controller, a remote, and around 14 free bundled games/experiences was $800.

            At the same time, a Vive with two motion controllers, two sensors, and less bundled free games/experiences was $800.

            Fact: At that time you got far more with the Rift for the same price as what you got with the Vive.

            Here’s another fact: The statement about getting far more with the Rift for the same price as the Vive [or less] is still just as true now.

            Here endeth the lesson.

          • impurekind

            Again, the third sensor was never needed for room scale, so adding that to the price is just you re-writing history for your own agenda. That would be like me saying “the cost of additional but optional head strap with built-in headphones for the Vive means it was another $100 more expensive than Rift at the time”.

            When Touch first launched for Rift–so at least we have a comparable setup between Rift and Vive to compare–it was $599 for the headset and $199 for the two Touch controllers and extra sensor.

            That’s $800 for the Rift plus two Touch controllers and two sensors. And the Vive was $800 for the headset plus motion controllers plus two sensors at that time too as I recall.

            BUT–and this is the big point here that you are clearly missing–if we FAIRLY use the $800 that both of them cost at the time for pretty much the same setup (give or take a few differences here and there, like better full room scale on Vive and superior motion controllers with proper finger input and superior ergonomic design on Rift), then the Rift still came with an ADDITIONAL and FREE Xbox One controller, a remote, a headset that actually had built-in headphones and a better strap, and a whole bunch of vastly superior free games and experiences.

            So, again, the Rift has always been and still remains the vastly superior value proposition–no matter how you try to fanboy spin it.

      • Courtney A Jeff

        Put out and on the map that opened up the door to competitors.Whether sued for breaking and breaching contract with zenimax…it still came and got pioneered by the same guys.

    • Palmer ? lol, it was Carmack that made modern VR happen.

  • MosBen

    Palmer Lucky using the “broken clock” analogy in this case is…ironic.

    • brandon9271

      Why is that?

      • MosBen

        He just kind of seems like a person that’s wrong about a lot of things in life.

        • pSynrg

          I wish I was as wrong as Palmer Lucky!

          • MosBen

            Being rich doesn’t make people immune to being obnoxious. Indeed, it seems to encourage it!

        • brandon9271

          For example?

          • MosBen

            His funding of a shitposting group to support Trump in the 2016 election is the big one.

          • David D. Taylor

            any examples relating to the topic? of technology? VR? AR? Or is your opinion of Luckey based solely on the stupid thing he did during the election?

          • MosBen

            Nope, I don’t have any specific issue with his thoughts on tech-specific subjects, but I think that my original comment stands.

          • Atheist Prophet

            Well, as far as tech goes he was not ‘wrong about a lot of things’ imho. I think he has a very realistic view of what gamers want/expect from VR.

          • Caven

            He was wrong about the “danger” of non-seated VR.

          • brandon9271

            What you meant to say was, you don’t like him because he doesn’t share your leftist view of politics. Which is fine but say what you mean.

          • MosBen

            No, I said what I meant.

          • WyrdestGeek

            Yes, that was thoroughly awful of him.

            I do not excuse his actions, but I still like his review of Magic Leap.

        • fdf

          Doesn’t seem like Luckey was wrong about supporting that Twitter group. Trump did won so good for him putting his eggs in the right basket.

          • MosBen

            That’s certainly a take. Not a great one, but a take nonetheless.

  • Dave

    Having tried the Hololens earlier this year it’s clear that AR is starting much further back than I had envisaged so this article was no suprise at all. VR is delivering now because a number of technologies have come together all at once, that hasn’t quite happened for AR yet even though it’s been proven as a prototype – this still feels like a prototype and not a consumer ready device.

    A lot of technology between AR and VR is common so advances in each industry will help each other but we’re probably 10 years away from having an AR like say a Nike sports glasses which gives you fitness information, GPS etc while running.

    • JJ

      The perception of starting further back was the exact fucked up situation the ML caused. They promised so much for the AR industry that everyone in it just said thats BS while outsiders were amazed at what AR could do. And since AR cant do those things all outsiders are now disappointing in AR. Thanks ML you screwed us all.

  • MrNoShill

    I’m just glad that roadtovr post an article about this. It just shows that you guys weren’t paid by Magic Leap to give their product a positive review / impression. Unlike other sites like uploadvr.

    • jj

      BOOM! thats the truth right there! Lots of respects kept/gained for stuff like this

    • kuhpunkt

      I paid them to give it a negative review. Is this better?

  • Zachary Scott Dickerson

    I hate to say I called it. Over hype. Can’t just throw piles of money at an idea and expect to have jetpacks and flying cars. Tech has to be ready. I was hopeful AR would be ready for a variety of business use, but doesn’t sound like it if it’s not much better than a hololens I tried.

  • HybridEnergy

    2.1 billion! BILLION! in investors. I still don’t freaking get it.

    • sfmike

      Wall Street doesn’t deal with reality only greed at the prospect of a quick buck. Already the VR bubble is breaking as investors have not seen the quick billions they were told VR would generate by now. We can only hope they don’t jump ship completely and VR goes the way of 3D TV.

      • HybridEnergy

        This is for AR, VR is a cat out of the bag. It’s not tech like 3d TV. Even if it stays the Niche that it is, which I think it will, it’s not going anywhere.

        • fdf

          VR is not a cat out of the bag. As much as it would be nice, it’s still stuck in a huge rut. The price of entry is still high and the content is still shitty and low in supply. And the last Nvidia cards did nothing but move back the hardware entry price point back to the 900’s series price point, which is when we were saying it was still too high of an entry for the average consumer.

          • HybridEnergy

            Price of entry was always high, it requires a headset, sensors, and all kinds of stuff to run. This won’t change too much for a while. Video cards being expensive hasn’t killed PC gaming and it won’t kill VR. The cat is out of the bag, it’s a niche cat (maybe forever) , but it’s out and not going anywhere. I couldn’t care less if it’s mainstream personally. More funding for games would be nice but there seems to be no slow down of content.

      • ummm…

        there are already industries and hobbyist built around this tech. it has advanced much further than any other attempt, billions have been spent by the leading companies of this world, and the largest companies ever to exist are busily trying to develop hardware for the consumer market

    • Lucidfeuer

      Tech washing money.

    • Jerald Doerr

      Crack… Strip clubs and blowjobs… That’s my ONLY GUESS!

    • Atheist Prophet

      “2.1 billion! BILLION!”

      Mostly in Facebook shares…

      That money is what we call goodwill. And you can write it in all caps but it still isn’t that much actually. Try buying Sony. If VR takes off and Oculus is at the forefront of it, it will make much more than that. But alas, anyone with half a brain could have foreseen that VR would take off to a slow start. We have been dreaming of this tech for decades… it would be naive to expect the first gen to instantly be consumer ready. Let’s just hope gen 2 will be gamer ready.

      • “If VR takes off” ? It already is.

    • Investors can be stupid.

  • I agree completely with Lucky, but the most important item from his blog post was how it (Magic Leap) “allowed them to monopolize funding in the AR investment community” from other developers who weree grounded, and not so pie in the sky thinking on product development.

    I also want to point out he was way too easy on Sixense (which no longer exists, and is now Sixense Enterprises, Inc with no mention of the word STEM), who is now on their 5th Kickstarter anniversary without a product or even a t-shirt. This is personal for me because I lost more than $500, and didn’t even get a response when I said I needed the pledge money back because my wife’s brain surgery. We managed and everything turned out okay in the end, except for the pain I have in my side whenever I hear the word Amir, Sixense or STEM.

  • David Herrington

    “I told you so”
    – Literally everyone

    • Lucidfeuer

      For once.

  • I also love the fact he “donated” it to IFIXIT which means he was done with it. I was wondering who the “donor” was in reviewing the IFIXIT teardown. Now I know.

    • JJ

      idk why i fixit couldnt get their own… theyre always the first to things

      • IFIXIT is in San Luis Obispo, CA (central coastal area) between LA & SF, so they may not have been eligible initially. Also, they could have been blacked listed, as has been the case with other “more” critical tech writers and YouTube producers who requested a review unity and invitation to see the prototype.

  • VirtualRealityNation

    Id like to throw this out there. I think that if the Holo-lens 2 comes with a 70-90 degree field of view, put the computer and battery on a belt clip, and has a noticeably faster processor that businesses will eat it up. Their first device had some obviously challenging flaws. If they course correct enough to bring us a significantly improved device in Q1 2019. They are the horse to beat for the foreseeable future of AR. And I think companies will start to really put their devices to good use for science, sales, entertainment, and more.

    • Zachary Scott Dickerson

      I hope a nice AR unit comes out in the next 4 years for commercial world. I have a few uses for it, but not unless it has a decent FOV and some customizable tracking.

  • anon

    Use Palmer-“sell-out”-Luckey for your next project or he will use his one VR success and his degree in journalism to push your baby right out of the nest.

    • Sandy Wich

      Sell out? You mean taking Oculus Rift to a company that had the resources to give the Rift a future? Touch? Go? Rift 2? AAA funded games, “even if they’re douche exclusives?

      If you wanted VR to stay a dev kit experience like AR is for the next 20 years, then by all means, keep it up.

  • Sandy Wich

    Just taking a look at current AR as a technology this should have been obvious to all, and it seems it kinda has been. Other than AR enthusiasts nobody cared/cares about AR technology unless it’s tied to conversation about the Marvel movies.

    AR will be cool, someday. When holograms exist. Maybe.

    But VR is here now, it’s new, it needs support. Glad AR is washing out so people can focus on technology that actually matters right now.

    • Lucio Lima

      What nonsense!

    • Graham

      I think there are lots of people interested in AR but I have to say that like you, I’m far more excited and interested in vr – certainly in relation to games anyway. The ability to be taken to a whole different world / place appeals to me far more than seeing stuff / characters in my living room.

    • Atheist Prophet

      “But VR is here now, it’s new, it needs support. Glad AR is washing out”

      I don’t think that’s the right mindset. Fast rendering, lenses, high PPI display tech, positional tracking, foveated rendering, motion controls… they are all foundational technologies shared by both AR and VR. So progress in one field is beneficial to the other field. AR *is* support for VR.

  • Joe Strout

    It’s worth pointing out that the low number of units moved is due to limits in supply, not demand. The vast majority of developers (including myself) are on a waiting list.

    I detect a hint of sour grapes in Luckey’s review, and an unjustified amount of hate in the comments here. Yes, ML1 was overhyped. Hype happens and you should account for it when setting your expectations. But AR really will be magic when it matures, and ML1 is a step in the right direction. Yes, we can all wish things would progress faster, and be hyped less, but it’s still a good device and I’m looking forward to developing for it.

    • JJ

      STOOOOOOOOP, you’re supporting them over hyping and LYING about AR tech that ultimately hurt the entire industry. They literally lied to you over and over again and we all called their BS. Don’t support them because you feel sorry for them, this is no better than the Hololense and by the time this makes any traction if it ever does the HL2 will come out and render this obsolete. Just have some respect for yourself as a consumer and developer and dont support shitty companies. Notice how Wired said ML is the largest secretive start up yet theyve gained almost the most investment any startup ever has. These two things should not go hand in hand!

      • Joe Strout

        Well, hate if you gotta hate, I guess. ML1 *is* better than HoloLens: it’s lighter, has a bigger FOV, has twice the focal planes, and doesn’t require Windows. And it’s slightly cheaper. That looks like progress to me. Yes, HL2 will probably be better, but then so will ML2. So it’s a technological arms race — we all win.

        • David D. Taylor

          We compare the ML1 to the hololens, because that’s all there is to compare it against, but it’s closer to comparing a next gen system to a last gen system. Of course ML1 is slightly… slightly, just a small step… better than hololens. It had 2 years of development beyond the release of hololens. 2 years later in technological advancement, 2 years of user feedback to address from hololens users, etc. I think that’s where the disappointment comes in for many people. Had this released alongside hololens, then it would have not gotten the hate. But two years later for a minor upgrade in some area, minor downgrade in others? That’s where the disappointment comes in.

          That, and the hype that ML shot themselves in the foot with.

          • Atheist Prophet

            Microsoft also had 2 years. So, where is Hololens 2?

            Also, I think this version is a stop-gap. They do have amazing display tech hidden away in their basement (either that or a whole bunch of people have been lying in interviews) but it just is not ready yet. The current dev kit is using a different tech!

            Will it ever be ready? I hope so, but I’m starting to doubt it. I feel this dev kit was an emergency measure by Magic Leap to buy more time. I think if we don’t see the real tech within 12 months it’s game over.

  • Kenny Thompson

    Sounds pretty on point to me.

  • cataflic

    extreme hype always hides poor value products.

  • impurekind

    Seems like pretty fair criticism to me.

    Maybe if Magic Leap hadn’t climbed so far up the hyperbole tree and rode the bullshot wagon so hard in the lead up to this developer version launch, it might have been a bit less underwhelming in what it’s actually doing.

    Magic Leap One a decent enough stepping stone for the future of proper consumer AR, however many years that is down the line. . . .

    • Get Schwifty!

      All sorts of business ventures take different forms, this one however sounds like one bordering on borderline a scam to investors by milking the potential of investors over creating a truly revolutionary consumer grade device. I almost laughed out loud when read the price for the ahem, “developer version”. Don’t get me wrong, I am glad for every company developing anything for VR, but I don’t want shysters in the middle typing up resources either… one can only imagine what could have been made if money here hadn’t been tied up with no doubt these fat cats promoting it living off a significant chunk. I still would not be surprised to see some of the corporate folks end up on American Greed one night.

      • Atheist Prophet

        I don’t think it is a scam. A prototype was shown that blew people away. But getting from that prototype to a consumer version turned out to be very difficult.

        The problem is this. ‘Normal people’ want to be lied to… as in it’s the same thing as with elections. The politicians promise streets paved with gold and the people seem to believe them.. and vote for them! Magic Leap played this game to get the funding needed to actually build it.

        At the same time IT/tech related people tend to be critical towards specs and interested in the details. And the promises were just too big. The dev kit is better than Hololens from what I gather (also: cheaper) which means they couldn’t have done *that* bad if they are beating a tech giant like MS. But people were expecting more. Much more. Too much. So now their hype is backfiring. Still I think this dev kit should buy them 6 months or so. But by then they better release something demonstrating their prototype’s level of amazing or it could turn real bad real quick.

  • WyrdestGeek

    FWIW, Luckey’s review of Magic Leap feels like it’s probably the most plainly accurate so far.

    Almost every other attempt to review it breaks over things like “ML won’t me talk about such-and-such.”

    Palmer’s was the first to take a tell-it-like-is approach instead of just feeling like it was regurgitating a press release.

    From his review:
    ` ` The cables are robust, and the weight tugging at the back of your head actually helps counterbalance things a little. They should have made the battery replaceable, but nobody is going to use their ML1 long enough for that to matter to anyone but collectors with an aim to preserve the history of AR and VR. ‘ ‘

  • LowRezSkyline

    I hope he has shoes and socks on.

  • nipple_pinchy

    After all that talk from that blowhard, Rony Abovitz, the Magic Leap turned out to be nothing but hot air. What a goof Abovitz is, but not as big a goof as the people he convinced to invest in him.

  • Hey, Lucky is back on the scene! Our nerd king returns! :)

    I think the other Leap, aka Leap Motion, might be the first company to truly bring AR to the masses. Their weird Project North Star system was amazing, and VERY affordable. That would get AR into hands of developers (Us) REALLY quick! I’ll get one of those as soon as somebody Kickstarter’s a pair.

    Of course, you wouldn’t want to wear those in the park either though… not because they wouldn’t work, but because they look hella weird.

    Hey.. what if some FAMOUS VR PIONEER WITH ALOT OF MONEY were to help fund a North Star release of their own? Wouldn’t that be a GOOD IDEA???? What if their initials were PL?

  • MosBen

    People who don’t like a politician should vote for a different politician. Secretly spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on a shitposting campaign is shitty behavior.

  • F1ForHelp

    I’m not surprised that there’s over 150 comments here…

  • lol the VC’s were deceived, tricked, hoodwinked, hoaxed, swindled, cheated, and double-crossed. I’d get my money back and invest in the new high resolution devices. VR in high resolution, safety approved, and wide FOV is what’s happenin’ ! That and any viable VR/AR portable device.