Surprised by low interest in and discussion of AR

[mattspace]

It's more relevant than you bad welding analogy.

No, it isn't.

Your entire point was that VR gear is impractical as all-day work attire, and I presented clear examples of how entire industries work all day in heavier, bulkier, and less comfortable PPE equipment, and that I had personally done both, and could attest to this fact.

You are mistaken in your views about VR gear. Maybe if you assigned less authority to Youtube in shaping your views, and attained for yourself some better real-world experience, you'd have a more complete picture of things.

 

[mattspace]

I will be following this space but until I can make use of the technology with normal light glasses that look no different to others than my own glasses, I doubt they'd be a 'wearable' for me - as in something I just leave on.

Like actual safe reliable self-driving cars, I suspect that is literally decades away.

Personally, I think it's more likely that any "just like real glasses" form factor, will be a smart version of 3D TV glasses for Apple's own screens, that do stereo separation based upon tracking their proximity and angle to the screen. Put them on, your (Apple Branded) screen becomes a depth box, and you can view 3d content within it.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Epic the game studio is effectively a completely different entity to Epic the Unreal developer. Within games dev no one seriously thinks Epic is going to pull the Unreal engine as a runtime environment from Apple platforms... but then again, within games dev, no one really uses Unreal's dev environment on macOS to develop for Apple platforms. Most iOS games are made on Windows boxes.

There's a reason Apple flipped on their banning of the Unreal Engine dev account within 24 hours that reveals the truth of wh provides who with legitimacy.

Apple didn’t flip, Epic got a restraining order, right?

And, as you state, as no one uses Unreal’s dev environment on macOS anyway, losing UE would mean little to Apple, developers would still develop those important iOS games on Windows boxes.

 

[mattspace]

Apple didn’t flip, Epic got a restraining order, right?

From memory, initially Apple banned both Epic Games Fortnight account, and the Unreal Engine dev account, but then unbanned the Engine account almost immediately, when it came to their attention that it would mean no game using unreal would be able to update.

And, as you state, as no one uses Unreal’s dev environment on macOS anyway, losing UE would mean little to Apple, developers would still develop those important iOS games on Windows boxes.

Yes, but without an Unreal Engine port to macOS / iOS, nothing developed in Unreal can be deployed on those platforms. Games aren't really "native" apps in the traditional sense, they're thin native wrappers around the game engines, which effectively work as VMs.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

From memory, initially Apple banned both Epic Games Fortnight account, and the Unreal Engine dev account, but then unbanned the Engine account almost immediately, when it came to their attention that it would mean no game using unreal would be able to update.

Looks like the judge said Apple COULDN’T retaliate against Epic’s Unreal Engine account. Apple didn’t have a choice in the matter.

Epic judge will protect Unreal Engine — but not Fortnite

Apple doesn’t have to bring Fortnite back to the App Store.

www.theverge.com

Yes, but without an Unreal Engine port to macOS / iOS, nothing developed in Unreal can be deployed on those platforms. Games aren't really "native" apps in the traditional sense, they're thin native wrappers around the game engines, which effectively work as VMs.

Right, but current development could continue, they just wouldn’t be able to pick up any new patches, bug fixes in the engine if Epic decided they wanted to put pressure on Apple by stopping development of UE on all Apple devices (which isn’t an impossibility).

I think it would have been very interesting to see what events would have occurred if Epic hadn’t filed the restraining order. Developers, making a good deal of money on the App Store wouldn’t be able to keep their code easily in synch anymore. Would they abandon the money they’re making on the App Store or abandon keeping updated with the engine? I tend to think they’d do whatever’s necessary to keep those iOS dollars flowing.

 

[mattspace]

Right, but current development could continue, they just wouldn’t be able to pick up any new patches, bug fixes in the engine if Epic decided they wanted to put pressure on Apple by stopping development of UE on all Apple devices (which isn’t an impossibility).

An unsuppported engine isn't really a viable target, so if Unreal Engine's account was yanked, that would be it for not only a significant portion of games on the App Store, but also a significant portion of games that Apple commissioned for Apple Arcade.

I think it would have been very interesting to see what events would have occurred if Epic hadn’t filed the restraining order. Developers, making a good deal of money on the App Store wouldn’t be able to keep their code easily in synch anymore. Would they abandon the money they’re making on the App Store or abandon keeping updated with the engine? I tend to think they’d do whatever’s necessary to keep those iOS dollars flowing.

I seem to recall figures that came to light recently, in which Apple's App stores were only ever about 10% of Epic's total fortnight revenue (Playstation was something like 40%), whereas Fortnight was some ridiculous percentage, I think it was 30%, of Apple's App Store revenue.

I don't think telling developers to expect to have to retool their entire dev toolchain, because Apple gets into spats with their engine provider "you want to be friends with me, you can't be friends with them" is a viable basis for anyone to build a business - easier to just go build PC and Console games.

 

[SeenJeen]

The Oculus Quest 2 is making massive waves in the industry.

I was gifted one a few months ago. Over the months I demo'd it with friends, and now 6 of those friends have bought one.

Lately a group of us have been watching Disney+ series through BigScreen... it's a lot of fun. It's basically like a big theater.

IMO the headset is still too heavy to use it more than a couple hours, but the technology is going to improve quick.

VR is past the gimmick stage at this point. It's already outselling Xbox and I'm sure it's nipping at the heels of the PS5. If I were a kid I'd be asking for a Oculus over a console.

 

[Bandaman]

AR is very cool, but also very boring at the same time. It’s not there yet.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

An unsuppported engine isn't really a viable target,

I agree it’s not a viable long term target, BUT if Epic decided they just weren’t interested in supporting Apple devices anymore, the reality is that all of the games that are available would still be available and could even still receive updates non-engine related updates. I’m not saying this is something developers would desire, but it’s not a “complete fail” state.

I seem to recall figures that came to light recently, in which Apple's App stores were only ever about 10% of Epic's total fortnight revenue (Playstation was something like 40%), whereas Fortnight was some ridiculous percentage, I think it was 30%, of Apple's App Store revenue.

Based on the information here:

Apple generated over $100 million in revenue from Fortnite

Fortnite players have spent almost $1.2 billion through Apple’s App Store.

fortune.com

it looks like roughly $100 million a year. In the years that Fortnite was on the App Store, Apple’s App Store revenues were
2018 - 46.6 billion
2019 - 55.5 billion
2020 - 72.3 billion

30% of 46.6 billion would be roughly 13.8 billion I think? As it appears Apple only made somewhere between 300 and 400 million on Fortnite over all of the years that Fortnite was available, that’s way less than 30% of App Store revenue. Maybe that’s the number for ALL of UE powered games on the App Store? I’ll see if I can find that.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I don't think telling developers to expect to have to retool their entire dev toolchain, because Apple gets into spats with their engine provider "you want to be friends with me, you can't be friends with them" is a viable basis for anyone to build a business - easier to just go build PC and Console games.

To be fair, Apple didn’t get into a spat with Epic. Apple was actually providing many hours of free support (well, support due to Epic having paid the $99 developer fee) to Epic and had no issues with them as a partner. Epic’s CEO made the decision to nullify the terms of the agreement between Epic and Apple with the un-allowed changes they made to Fortnite. If they’ve done it once, there’s nothing saying they wouldn’t do it again. (“If I don’t get my way, I’m not going to adhere to the terms of my agreement with you” is also not a viable basis for anyone to run a business )

For example, since most Apple focused UE developers develop on Windows anyway, Epic likely wouldn’t even feel the hit from developers that canceled their Apple focused licenses. So, if Epic’s CEO decided to be particularly mercurial one day and told his teams to stop development on UE for all Apple systems OR the CEO has his teams try to sneak an embedded payment system into the Engine (just like he had them sneak in the aforementioned un-allowed code) and thus gets the UE account removed, I can’t believe that the developers/publishers currently pulling in hundreds of millions of dollars would just give that up. Some would give up development altogether but, similar to when Apple made the 32-bit cut in iOS, those that would still like to pull in money from the billions of App Store users would do what was necessary to maintain viability on the App Store.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

The Oculus Quest 2 is making massive waves in the industry.

I was gifted one a few months ago. Over the months I demo'd it with friends, and now 6 of those friends have bought one.

Lately a group of us have been watching Disney+ series through BigScreen... it's a lot of fun. It's basically like a big theater.

IMO the headset is still too heavy to use it more than a couple hours, but the technology is going to improve quick.

VR is past the gimmick stage at this point. It's already outselling Xbox and I'm sure it's nipping at the heels of the PS5. If I were a kid I'd be asking for a Oculus over a console.

I think Facebook wants people to be in it for as long as possible for obvious reasons, but the most recent information we have from the leakers about Apple’s effort is that it would be geared towards putting it on, doing the thing you want to do, then taking it off. I’m expecting it will be comfortable enough for many hours continuously, but only the most hardcore would feel the need to have it on for that long. I actually know a kid that asked for an Oculus for this past Christmas

 

[mattspace]

I agree it’s not a viable long term target, BUT if Epic decided they just weren’t interested in supporting Apple devices anymore, the reality is that all of the games that are available would still be available and could even still receive updates non-engine related updates. I’m not saying this is something developers would desire, but it’s not a “complete fail” state.

AFAIK you keep paying for unreal engine after the game is deployed. I had an AR app for checking the free range status of eggs (it put a number of 3D chickens relating to stocking density running around on top of the carton) that was built in Unreal - the provider stopped paying for the engine, the app stopped working.

So, if Epic simply stopped offering engine renewal, thats all those games, no matter what people have paid, dead as doornails.

Based on the information here:

Yeah, I must have mis-remembered. Some comprehensive figures are here:

https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2021...ve-learned-from-the-epic-games-v-apple-trial/

Short version, is iOS was always a minority of Epic's Fortnite revenue, which I suppose they felt was worth risking, given they have game streaming to the browser as a technological workaround, and the opportunity to force a test case, and even get antitrust legislators interested (which appears to be working world-wide).

 

[Unregistered 4U]

So, if Epic simply stopped offering engine renewal, thats all those games, no matter what people have paid, dead as doornails.

I’m assuming that if:
a) Epic does something that gets their UE account pulled, that doesn’t affect Epic’s authentication service in any way. So Epic COULD keep those deployments active while whatever legal proceedings are ongoing. But if
b) Epic decides they don’t want to support deployments on Apple products anymore, yeah, those developers should just really hope Epic’s CEO continues to have an interest in supporting Apple.

is iOS was always a minority of Epic's Fortnite revenue,

And a tiny part of Apple’s. And, according to yesterday’s news, it was enough of their revenue that they did not want to let go of that revenue stream completely. Which goes back to a prior point… if a developer wants to keep those Apple customer dollars coming in, they’ll do whatever they need to do, even if that means reworking their UI and streaming their game It will be interesting to see how much of that revenue stream they’re able to rebuild.

 

[TJ82]

Nobody has privacy in public spaces so I’m not sure I follow the logic here. There are cameras recording public spaces at all times including beaches and restaurants etc. I do understand the wish for privacy but it’s just not reasonable to expect it in public spaces.
AR could be the next disruptive technology. Not likely the genie gets back in the bottle.

Right! Everything he’s describing already happens and exists. No clue what his argument is.

Did he post from the 1940s?

 

[mattspace]

Right! Everything he’s describing already happens and exists. No clue what his argument is.

Did he post from the 1940s?

The expectation of privacy in a public place is not a binary question. In general, a person has no expectation of privacy in a public context, but by the same token, the use of concealed or non-obvious cameras by individuals (ie not the state) is legally questionable as it crosses into stalking and harassment territory.

Where I live, for example, it is illegal to film or photograph at a children's playground, unless you are filming your own, and only your own child. Similarly, photography at beaches carries restrictions. These are public places, but purpose and context matters.

Any AR glasses that feature external cameras will be subject to both extreme legal requirements - clearly visible recording telltale lights, clearly audible shutter noises, and the restrictions of private venues who will almost certainly ban their usage - much like the way casinos ban the wearing of hats.

 

[richmlow]

Hello all,


I posted this reply in another thread on this topic.

All this talk about the "metaverse", virtual reality, Web 2.0, Web 3.0, etc. sounds really cool. People are imagining a future which is reminiscent of the movie "Ready Player One". However, to get this type of infrastructure in place and in a meaningful way which affects the general population would be a HUGE undertaking. It would not happen in your or my lifetime.

For example, what happened to the promise of "flying cars" for the general population!? That's been talked about for over half a century!

Everything looks "good" on paper. However, the reality of life is often much more prosaic than science fiction.

Just the opinion of a mathematician......


richmlow

 

[siri_3005]

Hello all,


I posted this reply in another thread on this topic.

All this talk about the "metaverse", virtual reality, Web 2.0, Web 3.0, etc. sounds really cool. People are imagining a future which is reminiscent of the movie "Ready Player One". However, to get this type of infrastructure in place and in a meaningful way which affects the general population would be a HUGE undertaking. It would not happen in your or my lifetime.

For example, what happened to the promise of "flying cars" for the general population!? That's been talked about for over half a century!

Everything looks "good" on paper. However, the reality of life is often much more prosaic than science fiction.

Just the opinion of a mathematician......


richmlow

Honestly I don't see the appeal in metaverse/VR thingy for now since it seems too early imo.

 

[RadioHedgeFund]

There isn’t much positive discussion because nobody has really thought of a consumer-level usage situation for a headset yet. The best technology is invisible and having a barrier like a dorky headset or even large glasses is not breaking down walls: it is building them.

 

[polyphenol]

This story from The Guardian in the UK seems relevant:

Rising popularity of VR headsets sparks 31% rise in insurance claims​

Metaverse gamers crashing into furniture behind increase in home contents claims, says insurer Aviva
https://www.theguardian.com/technol...r-headsets-sparks-31-rise-in-insurance-claims

 

[CodeSpyder]

I wonder if LIDAR could be used to scan a golf green in order to get a measure of the slope to aid in putting. Hmm, no need to wonder.

Golf Scope - AR Green Reading by Golf Scope Inc.

Using Apple's ARKit technology, the app can help show you exactly where to aim your putt on the green

appadvice.com

 

[Jensend]

This story from The Guardian in the UK seems relevant:

Rising popularity of VR headsets sparks 31% rise in insurance claims​

Metaverse gamers crashing into furniture behind increase in home contents claims, says insurer Aviva
https://www.theguardian.com/technol...r-headsets-sparks-31-rise-in-insurance-claims

All that article says is that there is a 31% rise in insurance claims related to VR compared to the previous year—likely because VR usage is up about 31% from the previous year. It says nothing about how much claims rose in general, as the headline implies.

 

[polyphenol]

And a 68% increase since 2016.

But the point is that the number of claims is sufficient to be categorised.

I'd be happy to have a discount on insurance for not using VR.

 

[Imhotep397]

I had expected more interest in AR by our tech embracing community...

AR has been around since not too long before the introduction of the first iPhone. If the tech was going to blow up, or at least garner a significant amount of interest from tech enthusiasts it would have done so early in the adoption of the neo smartphone era (iPhone and copies.)

 

[InuNacho]

I remember that scene in Jurassic Park where the guy was playing with the strand of DNA with a VR handset. I remember thinking "wow I can't wait until everything is VR"!

Fast-forward almost 30 years later and realistically it didn't make sense then and it still doesn't make sense now.
Really, outside of gaming what is the point? Yes I have seen some interesting training involving surgeons and AR but maybe I'm dumb and don't see how programming something for hours upon hours could be beneficial for anything on the lower end.

I have used apps that read resistors based on their color coding and have used the rough translations of Google Translate. I think that is the closest the masses will reach in the AR/VR realm.

 

[CodeSpyder]

I remember that scene in Jurassic Park where the guy was playing with the strand of DNA with a VR handset. I remember thinking "wow I can't wait until everything is VR"!

Fast-forward almost 30 years later and realistically it didn't make sense then and it still doesn't make sense now.
Really, outside of gaming what is the point? Yes I have seen some interesting training involving surgeons and AR but maybe I'm dumb and don't see how programming something for hours upon hours could be beneficial for anything on the lower end.

I have used apps that read resistors based on their color coding and have used the rough translations of Google Translate. I think that is the closest the masses will reach in the AR/VR realm.

View attachment 1963219

A scenario: You go into a museum with your Apple Glasses on. You start up the Museum's app and look around. Coming up to a painting, a sign appears next to the painting which explains the history of the painting. The app is using image anchors to anchor virtual content to the image of paintings throughout the museum. Once the image is recognized, the virtual content is displayed next to the painting along with a virtual button to turn off the display of information.