AR is still young

I need to blog about this (yeah yeah and part 2 of the Canyon… I have not forgotten).
VR vs AR.
I have been tinkering a teeny tiny bit with VR the past week, enough to know that I am not really a fan (just yet).
On the other hand, everything I read about AR gets me all sorts of giddy excited.

VR, or virtual reality is movies or computer generated 3D content that is able to be controlled by the user (mostly head tracking – so as you look around, you can really look around the view).
Think of the old Viewmaster slide wheels you used to have (or your kids).
That cartoon 3D view has grown up.

AR or augmented reality is a bit similar, but has the cartoon (or computer) generated content overlaid with reality, the room you are in for example.

This is about AR.

It is a long write up, I want to block quote a lot of it because it is the first article I have read that fits with what I have been thinking for a while.
Computer gamers are all over VR, Terry is saving like crazy for his head set, but devs are more for AR.
It is going too far, but roughly thinking (mine), VR is for computer games, AR is for work.

Microsoft seems to be looking to the latter.

HoloLens, the augmented reality headset Microsoft’s been touting as a future pillar of its Windows business, isn’t “fun” to use. At least, it wasn’t for me during my whirlwind round of developer-focused demos at Microsoft’s flagship store in New York. That’s to say, any and all comparisons to emerging virtual reality tech and related gaming or entertainment applications should be excised from the conversation for now. It’s not “immersive” as one Microsoft rep stressed to me, clearly keen to avoid the confused commingling of AR and VR buzzwords. It’s “complementary.”

That is where I am going to leave it since it is very young and not many of my readers will be all that interested in something that is both expensive and rare.

I will blog about my adventures in AR which is a lot more affordable and approachable at the moment.