“So Badass You Can’t Believe It” Magic Leap Raises $542 Million To Launch The Future Of Computing
An ambitious, stealthy startup recruits Google, Qualcomm, and VC and Hollywood A-listers to build next-gen augmented and virtual reality.
Instead Google is going to project content right into your eye.
Magic Leap just finished $542 million in second-round financing led by Google, not Google Ventures, but by the main company.
What makes this different from Glass? For one… you don't look "at" it, everything appears as if it's just there as a part of your reality.
On top of throwing money at it and leading the second-round financing Android and Chrome leader Sundar Pichai will join Magic Leap's board, as will Google's corporate development vice-president Don Harrison. Investors include Qualcomm, Legendary Entertainment and its CEO Thomas Tull, along with A-list VCs Andreessen Horowitz and Kleiner Perkins (so so big players). Tull,who heard about the tech from a buddy at Weta… the folks who made The Lord of the Rings trilogy, is attached to The Dark Knight, Godzilla, and the upcoming Interstellar.
This was central to my bearish thesis on a supplier, himax technology.
In that display technology won't be the next big thing?
Have they actually got a prototype yet? I thought they were still at the very very early optics research stage.
Theres plenty of steroscopic transparent AR specs with center fields of view (META,Vuzix,Epison) – but this was going further then that to try to get focus correct using lightfields. Which is a BIG leap over whats there already.
That said one thing with projection; Cant do blacks. Or any contrast. (just in case anyone thinks you can go for the sorts of slick "two dots either side of the eye" headsets used in Farscape)
Why am I reminded of the fan fair before Segway was unveiled?
They must have a prototype +Thomas Wrobel because people are quoted in the article as having used it.
LOL… fair point +Gavin Hudson and while the Segway was cool it didn't cause the transformation of transportation as promised. Side note: We had one at a user conference we held and no clients would get on it so I just got to ride it all a bunch of times. Then they told me there was a limiter on it, to which I begged them to disable…. they go much faster than I expected and I almost crashed it into this giant end table at the end of a very long hotel hallway. lol
I always think its a little unfair the hate the Segway gets. Its still a darn clever device, and I suspect many saying ""why don't you just walk" are also the sort to get in their car for anything more then a 10minute journey 😛
And yes, they can go quite a speed. Humorously I think I saw they made an offroad version too.
Anyway, I'll check it out as that sounds quite different to what I read a few weeks back.
Yeah once you do I'd be interested in your take on it +Thomas Wrobel. And yes… the Segway did get some spit thrown on it, but it was also WAY over-hyped. And man you're right… I had no idea how fast it would go once they unlocked it and it's all about your body positioning for speed/slowing down…. I freaked out and jumped off while still holding onto the handles. To say it pulled me down the hallway "a bit" would be an understatement and I nearly ran into this giant end table. When I say "end table" I don't mean a conference table, but like a fancy schmancey one at one of the nicest hotels in Saint Louis. Luckily, I didn't crash it and everybody got a good laugh but after that I could never criticize them as not being able to haul ass that's for sure.
Well, its always confusing when something is described by what its not. Still, I am glade they dont want Rift comparisons – too much of this stuff is blended together. While "ideal" AR device would have VR as a subset (if you can overlay anything onto your field of view, then you can overlay everything…), its near impossible to expect a dedicated VR device to be beaten in a mobile AR device. Different classes of products.
Honestly..haven't a clue, but I'll give it a go.
Id like to get excited, but obviously theres a bias towards there own hype here. And we only have confirmation of a pixel demo 😉
Ok, that disclaimer out the way, heres my theory;
They talk both of "not stereoscopic 3d" and "lightfield" tech. That means light not just going in one direction, but many – meaning full focus can be simulated. (your eye can refocus and the image will be exactly like focusing on a real object). If they have devised a way to output a lightfield practically in a display this means that you don't need two separate display images to produce a 3d image.
So "not stereoscopic".
Imagine looking out a window…you still see the world in 3d, despite it being only one plane of glass. I believe they have achieved the same thing, only with any view out that glass.
This potentially means the form of the HMD, or tablet, or anything will also have passive headtracking. You move your head, you get a different view….without needing the machine to know where your head is.
(This will, of course, all be great news for that Lyto camera thing).
*Lytro
Also, if its what I think it is..umm…this would actually suddenly make "invisibility" by filming whats behind you and projecting in front possible. (as it would now work from all angels).
So, $550 from Google followed by $50billion from the US military after they get a prototype demod 😉
My understanding isn't that you look "through" it, as if they are glasses and the image is on the glass in front of you, but instead it's projected onto your retina (http://techcrunch.com/2014/10/21/magic-leap-tech/). Though it may do so by the user needing to wear glasses to achieve the effect.
"…since it goes well beyond that and provides truly integrated, 3D digital objects that looks as though they were physical objects, alongside the real world." So you're certainly spot on about the lightfield tech sort of thing and the need to not refocus on the object… it'd just be "there".
Thing is though, projection has limited contrast…you cant project black. So not being able to make anything darker then the background would probably lose the immersion aspect during daytime.
I guess it could be combined with a simple LCD lens to dynamicly dimm the background though.
hmmm… good point and I guess we'll have to wait and see. That said, the brain can be tricked into some cool effects.
For instance, check this out: http://www.popularscience.co.uk/blog/?p=1478
In that the "B" looks light grey, and the A looks dark (I know… not black but just illustrating that we can trick out brains with light/dark) but they are in fact the same color.
Wont load. But I assume its the checkerboard one I saw that before. I wasn't convinced until I took a screenshot and dragged on to the other side 😛 Really strong illusion.