It's not, though. DoD rolled out IHADSS for Apache pilots in '85. It was a major plot component in 1990's "Firebirds." DoD was so impressed with the results that they went "behind me Satan" and kept it off everything else until 2015. Okay, I'll play. What information? An anecdote: I resisted cell phones until about 2005. It was only when people got angry at me for not being available that I relented, and I immediately got something that ran Windows. My thinking? places have phone numbers, not people. If someone wanted to get ahold of me they could call me at home. at work. If I wasn't at those places, then I wasn't available by phone. End of story. I haven't had a real job in more than 15 years? But fuck you I'm not strapping my job to my face. Never ever ever. The ability to put it down is the difference between "working a job" and "being a job" and for ten years I held a profession in which I was surrounded by literal millions of dollars of technology. Literally dozens of screens in front of me, literally hundreds of channels of audio. I should be the poster child of this whole push and with no ambivalence: hell no.good eye tracking effectively pulled into a user interface system is new, and useful.
A quality platform for 3d interfaces may challenge our dependence on 2d rectangles to convey information.
Can a (well-paid) white collar office worker be more comfortable with a free-moving headset rather than be locked to a desk to rest their laptop and peripherals off of?
I'll bite. seems like apples and oranges, IHADSS tech is over 30 years old, is over twice as heavy and is a monocular display which quote When...used, the visual input to the two eyes differs greatly. This...gives rise to binocular rivalry, a competition between the two eyes for the information that gains attention Which won't occur with the vision pro. More criticisms in the paper you linked are difficult to also levy against the vision pro: Most problems that I have had are due to faulty equipment. Examples: The greyscale is not able to be properly adjusted. This leads to reduced resolution and the inability to 'break out' details uncomfortable, and the thinner versions of the cord gets wrapped around things in the cockpit. Getting a decent picture requires the combiner lens to be placed right next to the eye - anything interfering with that placement (such as NBC masks) makes it impossible to get a full field of view (and the "full" field of view isn't sufficient anyway You can still have your switches and dials, they'll still be programmable, but now with the option to keep them static or have them change function based on what you're looking at. I think that's cool and smoother than alt-tab'ing. Your choice is strapping your work to your face or to your lap/desk, like how you strap the time to your wrist. It's new, but not extreme. I also don't think it will be necessary for anyone to get their work done, but it may be more comfortable or effective. Just because your computer is now strapped to your face does not mean you're a slave to it and cannot unstrap it. That's is the slippery slope that everyone has to climb up off of in order to deal with the difficulties of modernity today. For better or for worse, in our own lives we have to find habits that handle isolation, distance from nature, lack of physical exercise, hustle/overwork culture, tech addiction, and mindless consumption. It's either that or you make choices to take temptations out of your life, i.e. don't strap your job to your face. (I'm also waiting for a good speech-to-text interface demo, that's the biggest need for a keyboard right now. As a programmer, I would also like spoken dialects/grammars that make speech-to-code fast)"The is a very poor system in every respect. It is heavy, sloppy, provides a poor quality picture and a narrow field of view, the monocular display is annoying and
My point exactly. The deep pockets of the defense industry has had 30 years to go "well this is a nice idea but" and instead, they largely went "nope." The F-35 has a $400k nerd helmet because there's this one Israeli company that's been going gangbusters on helmet displays ever since and there is no tech that wasn't slapped on the F-35. At an acquisition cost of $1.5b per fighter, what's a $400k helmet between friends? Cadillac first demo'd a heads-up display in 1982. GM finally put it on a Corvette in '99. What has been an obvious and necessary innovation for fighter aircraft since the DeHavilland Mosquito finally made it onto passenger aircraft in the mid '90s... and fully-farkled sports cars not long after. I'd pay extra for a HUD, and I'd pay more extra to turn off half the shit Cadillac thinks you need because the point is the disco lights, not the information. There's a logical progression in HUDs, from cutting-edge to expensive car to, probably, normie shit in the next ten years. The logical progression with AR is from "yay" to "nope" to "I guess this is a buzzword now." My switches and dials are programmable. They switch based on what I have focus on. I've got a $5k control surface that will latch to anything across two computers. I've had it for ten years. Never once - not once - have I had the slightest desire to slave it to anything but Pro Tools. Every time I download new software for it, which is often, because I've been a part of the NDA beta for the entirety of that ten years, I hit the "stop switching focus" radio button in the control software. This shit won a red dot design award in 2006 and everyone went "...nope." Nobody wants that. You think it's cool because you've never been in a position to need knobs and switches at all so it's all hypothetical to you.I'll bite. seems like apples and oranges, IHADSS tech is over 30 years old
They never pulled an iPhone out of those deep pockets. You can be sure an iPhone is in most of them today. You still have a hard time comparing a HUD built for a fighter pilot in a F-35 with an AR device built for a digital work and life-style. Keep your knobs and switches, give up a couple displays. I'm no technophile, I think there's a greater movement towards real-world experiences coming, but I think AR will be more and more common for work and entertainment.
here's Vannavar Bush describing an iPad in 1945. Again, speaking as a CAD monkey, I first used a Digitizer in 1988. UI for design predates UI for anything else; the digitizer was available before the mouse, but wasn't as widely adopted. A mouse is basically a digitizer with diarrhea and despite trackballs predating them by a dozen years, nobody really wants one. Trackpads are used on laptops because they take up less room, but if we're serious about it we still grab a mouse. Windows laptops have had touchscreens almost by default for seven or eight years now and yet touch interfaces remain largely unused. iPhones? iPhones were about the fifth generation tech device; we started with the Newton, then Windows PDAs, then Blackberries, then Windows phones, then the iPhone and the iPhone really took off because you could fuck around with it without pretending you bought it for Excel. It's all just Ubiquitous Computing which has been a buzzword since '88. Technologically? The iPhone was not a revolutionary device. The advantage of the iPhone is that it wasn't a Steve Ballmer piece of shit. More than that, it permanently killed the one thing you really need for productivity: a keyboard. So no, I don't have a hard time comparing a HUD for a fighter with a HUD for "digital work and lifestyle." The fighter ostensibly NEEDS it at any price while the "digital work and lifestyle" crew can be talked into buying it. This is a utility discussion through and through. My argument is "if we needed that we'd have it by now" and your argument is "well we have it now surely we'll find something to do with it." Nah. Doesn't work that way. iPhones and iPads recognize that nobody really needed computers for more than facebook, instagram and youtube so now that's all anybody uses them for. I've got grown women in their '30s on my payroll who are fucking flabbergasted by email because it's just not a part of their lives. Roughly a third of the patients we call at any given time have full mailboxes that can't accept messages because voicemail is simply not a part of their horizon. Our utilization of technology has gone down over the past 20 years while our consumption of technology has gone up; we're doing more with less. Nerd helmets run contrary to this trend. You won't hate Zoom less if it's on your face. Spreadsheets will be no cooler, and if seeing Youtube videos that fill a wall is what you want, you can buy two 85" Sony LCD TVs for less than the Apple thing. For that matter, you can buy a 76" LCD for less than a Meta Quest 2, so most people do.