On the subject of context I wrote a short post back in 2018 [0].

Smart people spend time on this problem/solution.

Solutions appear but fall short of expectations.

The technology or more commonly that application of it is stigmatised.

Sometimes the whole field becomes tainted.

The problem/solution complex is declared a “dead end” or “false dawn”.

Interest cools. Nobody invests for a while. The wreckage of the previous cycle rusts away. The craters erode. This takes 20-30 years.

During this period, some very small companies, academics, and individuals continue to guard the flame, but lack funding or new talent to advance.

Go to step 1, invent new buzzwords/framing and repeat.

Ignore much of what was learned during the previous cycle.

[1] https://blog.eutopian.io/the-next-big-thing-go-back-to-the-f...

▲

zik 8 months ago | parent [-]

I remember the excitement around VR back in the late 80s. These new polhemous motion tracking devices and LED microdisplays were going to change the world! Except the technology was expensive and ultimately it kinda sucked. It was barely used outside academia, interest died off gradually and eventually it was tacitly acknowledged to be going nowhere.

Then 30 years on Oculus was founded and everyone who'd never used one of the old VR systems was super excited. To be fair, the technology was a step better - much cheaper and more accessible, low motion input latencies, better resolutions. But ultimately it's still not really quite good enough and it seems that the hard reality is it's not going to make its way into mainstream consumer everyday use this time either.

I can't wait for round 3 in 2040 or so.

▲

diggan 8 months ago | parent | next [-]

> But ultimately it's still not really quite good enough

I'm not sure what use cases you've tried it, but I'm "playing" a bunch of flight simulators, and after getting used using a HP Reverb 2 for all my simming, it's basically impossible to move back to "flat" screens again. It gives you a completely different depth-perception that is as vital when you fly as when you race, so basically any simming is a lot easier and more fun with VR. But again, if you make the plunge into VR simming, it's short of impossible to go back to "normal" afterwards.

> hard reality is it's not going to make its way into mainstream consumer everyday use this time either.

Yeah, simultaneously I agree with this. VR-in-motion (so not sitting still) is still pretty bad, and the setups you need for good performance are pretty expensive, so it's unlikely to break into mainstream unless some breakthrough is being made. With that said, there are niches that are very well served by VR and personally I guess I hope it'll be enough when the mainstream hype dies off.

▲

dingnuts 8 months ago | parent [-]

I disagree, I played a lot of Elite: Dangerous with a VR headset and while I completely agree about the scale, it was so much hassle to get in and out of the goggles and get everything set up and then to be totally cut off from the real world for any extended period that I stopped using it.

It's been in the closet for a few years. Beat Saber is fun too, but.. I guess if you're the kind of person who has a sim setup in a dedicated room in your house it's still appealing but for anyone remotely casual it's just not worth it

	▲	jerf 8 months ago \| parent [-]
		VR has moved from "only enthusiasts can even consider it" to "viable niche". That's a huge step up... viewed logarithmically you could even call it "halfway there". But it definitely needs a couple more revs before it gets to "mainstream accessible".

▲

yaky 8 months ago | parent | prev | next [-]

IIRC there was a brief VR spike around early 2000s. I remember trying out Duke Nukem in a helmet and a three-button controller.

And then a bit later, there were 3D glasses, ones that synchronized with the high-rate monitor to show each eye its respective right and left frame. The demo for it at the time was Rogue Squadron and I thought the effect was amazing.

▲

psunavy03 8 months ago | parent | prev | next [-]

AR is the true future, but we're a materials science breakthrough away. You need waveguides or some similar thing that generates holograms that's cheap, has a wide FOV, and works in bright light. HoloLens and Magic Leap came close, but people couldn't figure out how to make enough money off the devices, apparently.

	▲	echelon 8 months ago \| parent [-]
		Is it? I don't want to see sports teams playing on my coffee table. I don't want to see recipes dancing in front of me while I wear glasses in front of a stove, the humidity of boiling water vapor sticking to plastic lenses. I don't want people dicking around with headwear while they're supposed to be driving. I don't want to see contact and bio information hovering above my friends. And I certainly don't want to see ad overlays throughout daily life. I want to escape life and enter fantasy worlds. I want to be transported. I want to see the Matrix unfold in front of me. That's about as far from AR or XR as I can imagine.

▲

grogenaut 8 months ago | parent | prev [-]

Maybe the change is the internet amplifies those holding the flame longer, like those responding parallel to me