Where Are the High-Res Head-Mounted Displays? 384
vivian writes "Ever since 1996, when I first set eyes on a Sony GlassTron head-mounted display in Japan, I have been awaiting a lightweight, head-mounted display that actually has decent resolution and doesn't look like a brick tied to your face. The closest contender to date seems to be the WRAP 920AV from Vuzix, and they are partially transparent too, which is great, but as with every other unit I have found, they only offer video quality — 640x480. Given that there have been a number of other discussions on Slashdot, I can't be the only one here who is eagerly awaiting something that could actually be a viable alternative to a PC monitor — especially for gaming or 3d graphics work. Perhaps we could petition a manufacturer to make what we actually want? Something with a minimum of 1024x768 @30-60hz refresh, say, and capable of stereo vision. Extra karma if they incorporate head tracking."
Re:VR was more hype than reality (Score:5, Insightful)
The VR of the 90's is dead. Long live augmented realtiy.
Augmented reality != Isolated VR rooms as you have described above.
Augmented reality requires transparent HMDs or something similar so that visual reality can be augmented with extra information and not hugeass displays in a room somewhere.
Chicken vs Egg (Score:3, Insightful)
I think that head mounted displays face something of a chicken vs. the egg situation. Simply put there just aren't currently any real applications for such a device. Traditional video obscures your vision. So, in order to watch it on one of these you must be standing (or sitting) still in one place. In which case traditional displays are simply a more economic way of showing the video anyways.
I suppose that the "killer app" for head mounted displays is augmented reality (or AR), in which you would overlay digital data on the real world. But such technology is very much still in the laboratory stage of development (although some of it is just starting to make its way onto smart phones).
Re:Chicken vs Egg (Score:4, Insightful)
I think what you're saying is that until PORN comes available on HMD, it isn't going to take off. You'd be amazed at how much porn drives technology.
the problem is purely social... (Score:4, Insightful)
People just don't want to be teased with "hey Geordi" everywhere. It's bad enough at my job... I have a Linux box and a Windows box, each with dual monitors (not particularly big ones) and it's always "hey Houston, are you sure you don't need another monitor?" Everyone else
I always thought HMDs sounded like a great idea, too. I guess they won't be socially accepted until they're integrated into eyeglasses without any noticeable extra bulges anywhere, and wireless too. How to get the battery into such a small form factor will be quite a trick to pull off.
Re:VR was more hype than reality (Score:5, Insightful)
You know, I've been wearing glasses since I was 12 or so and all of this time they have always been a hindrance. They fall off, get crushed by a passer-by when I'm swimming, get scratched up, press up against my face when I fall asleep in the chair, fly off when I get on a roller coaster, get in the way when kissing and cause all other kinds of trouble. It would be nice to get something extra out of the bit of wasted realestate on my face.
Nerd rage, baby!
Re:VR was more hype than reality (Score:5, Insightful)
Because it just hangs on the wall, probably doesn't provide 3D, and I stop seeing it the moment I turn around or leave the room.
That's a very restricted solution. It works if you have a room to dedicate to it, and you're happy enough to interact with the system in one unique place. I think that's a pain and very limiting. Technology advances towards being portable. Making a huge investment in something I can't use most of the time seems the wrong way to go for me.
Er, a room covered with displays is exactly the old concept of VR. You're replacing reality completely there, except that instead wearing hardware it's all around you.
My understanding of "augmented reality" is precisely an HMD that mixes reality with VR. Things like:
Constant Internet connection that can be used at any time in any place
GPS overlay right over your vision while walking on the street
Vision enhacement - take the normal vision and modify it, by highlighting important things, removing ads, allow attaching a virtual sticky note on any building, extra cameras that allow to see from the back of your head or in infrared, easy lookups of data about things you see.
AR games: Merge reality and a game, playing say, a FPS in a park. Create a chessboard on any surface.
Merging RL with another world: I'd really like to be able to for instance merge RL with Second Life and make it so that somebody from SL can virtually sit near me and appear to be there.
glasses? (Score:5, Insightful)
HMD's are so retro-chic. Don't you know that all the cool research is now tapping the brain's retina layer to augment/alter vision?
These days, I'm waiting for the hat/camera/socket that allow for text overlay, enhanced-spectrum cameras, and novel perspectives to our existing firmware.
Remember, when dreaming go big.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
OLED to the rescue (again) (Score:3, Insightful)
I bet weight and size has something to do with this. When OLED screen tech becomes commonplace, we'll see plenty more of these things. In addition to the other advantages of OLED, the high aperture ratio is useful (to avoid the screen door [wikipedia.org] effect), the size and weight is reduced compared to even LCD, and perhaps even more importantly, the viewing angle issue is solved completely.
Perhaps more importantly, OLED can probably obtain a much higher pixel density more easily (considering this source [microoled.net], and also how small the 11" TV from Sony is...). The former mentioned a 0.38" display with a resolution of 560,000 pixels (1.7 million subpixels) in a press release. Anything even remotely close to that would be amazing.
Re:VR was more hype than reality (Score:5, Insightful)
That's depressing. I can't recall having been so disappointed in /.'s "geek" credibility. Anyone who reads/posts here has NO business being confused about a) why a head-mounted semi-transparent display is FUNDAMENTALLY different than a large wall-mounted LCD or b) what augmented reality is.
Re:Disappointment about the future. (Score:2, Insightful)
We didn't get to cruise in Cyber Space we got Snow Crashed in AOL.
Who cares for places like Face Book? What happened to the cool places? Who's running Simulacron-3?
We've been talking about AI for 60 years but it appears the Ghost in the Shell is still born (regardless of those promoting a Singularity... unless it's name is Rush)
Re:because we soon found that (Score:4, Insightful)
You know, some of us would be willing to have the display involve a lens as well as the actual display element. Then your eye could focus at a normal distance (2m or so, for example) and see the tiny display in-focus.
Re:The shoot your eyes out!! (Score:2, Insightful)
Why emit light in the first place?
Some display technologies, such as electronic paper, don't.
Re:VR was more hype than reality (Score:3, Insightful)
The 60" figure is just some market-drone BS they made up of what its equivalent would be if you imagined you were looking at a TV in your living room (i.e. sitting 9-12 feet from the screen). But bigger != better. There's a reason nobody wants a 640x480 display: it looks like total crap, and it's the exact same tech they had for sale at the sharper image in the late 80s. I didn't want it then, and I don't want it now.
The trouble is: bigger means worse in this context. If you have 20/20 vision, then you would have to sit about 20-25 feet from a 60" 480p screen to avoid being distracted by pixels. Make these things 1080p and shrink them a bit so it's like a 50" (yes, smaller) screen at 9 feet away, and then people won't be bothered by the pixels, and people will actually buy these things. In short, it need to have about 9x higher pixel density.
Attention wearable display makers: Give me a 1080p resolution wearable display for under $500, or go jump off a fucking cliff.
Re:Disappointment about the future. (Score:2, Insightful)
> You know I'm the son of the baby boomer generation. We were promised a lot.
Bullshit. You weren't promised a bloody thing. Predictions were made as to what you would accomplish. You screwed up.
> We were all told we were special and that we'd have all these new things to do things
> with and new ways to do stuff.
And so you sat on your ass waiting for someone to create them for you. And there you sit still, whining. Get over it. You aren't special and never were.
Re:VR was more hype than reality (Score:5, Insightful)
Because I'd rather they hacked my glasses (which I can take off) than my brain?
(Find me an OS or similar level project with zero security breaks, and I'll consider letting that team of programmers near a system I'd install in my head.)
Re:The Movie Hackers (Score:3, Insightful)
Ah, Gia [imdb.com]. That was back when Angelina Jolie looked perfect.
Re:VR was more hype than reality (Score:2, Insightful)
It is background entertainment. Some killing machines like to listen to music, others prefer a bit of source code to go with their symphony of destruction.