alabtrosMyster on 14 April 2015
What I find funny (desperate pr twist?) is that they keep calling the images holograms... holograms would not require glasses, if this definition of holograms is accepted, why not say 3D TVs are holograms? I mean, if you set the bar low enough evryboty can step above it...
Anyway, this does not remove the potential of the tech, but I think saying it has "more potential than VR' is stretcing it, there are obvious limitations, like with any tech and it has its place , alongside VR, tablets, smart phones and the desktop computers... it does a different thing, similar to google glasses (which google had the good sense to realize they were likely chasing a pipe dream, MS may not have that wisdom).
