Magic Leap - How Much Longer Now?

well from the presentation he mentions 2 years as the first point of reference so according to him we should have the first device by then? AR is still so early days, I'd be surprised if they released anything this year.

I think it's obviously form factor is where they are struggling the most, but they have significant backing from Google so that gives me hope it's not snake oil! :)

I can't believe it. Before seeing this I posted that I believe they are a fraud. I believe the big companies like google fell for a huge scam.

inovator said:

I can't believe it. Before seeing this I posted that I believe they are a fraud. I believe the big companies like google fell for a huge scam.

That's Google's fault.  Surely they sent some of their best engineers to check what research Magic Leap had done before putting any money in?

andyring said:

....

That's Google's fault.  Surely they sent some of their best engineers to check what research Magic Leap had done before putting any money in?

Sadly the story is a little like the MarkZ due diligence done on OVR!
Short and Sweet!

The story doing the rounds is that the ML investment was not done by the normal Google investment team, but directed by an influential executive who executed the investment over the head of the core team.

Anyone that has been following the ML story will be aware that they have sued departing employees to keep secret company issues (it was claimed) while being sued by a female employee over claimed misogynistic behavior. It just feels like that leak of the failure to achieve any of their goals, and the proposed dev systems limitations is a mirror on a company with a lot of issues badly run by an arrogant and delusional management team that promised more than they could ever achieve with their skill-set.

The big issue is what will the board do if the demonstration is as underwhelming as everyone feels? Can ML be refocused on releasing anything like they promised - and what about companies like Lucas/Disney that brought into the hype, will they stand to be made to look such fools?

Sit back with the popcorn peeps!

I just wrote a reply to another ML discussion and thought that I should share it here:

Answering your Question - the original team at ML showed a demonstration using a bench top demonstrator called the 'Beast' back in 2013/14(1). This system had users place their face in a certain position and look into the device (large photocopier size box like contraption) - with some demos the user placed their hand into the viewing area. And the Beast would track and project an image into this space and interact with the user's hands(2) (the basis of the elephant video(2a)).

1.  2. 2a.

The Beast was not advance "magical technology" but based on the same principles as the eye surgery visualization technology(3) [patented] that the co-founder was familiar with from his previous day job! The system using a special holographic lens (Photonic Chip(4)) to achieve the perception of depth and environment awareness for the image. ML promised that they would be able to scale the Beast down to a wearable design with sci-fi glasses and just needed investment to "own the AR market!"

3.   4.

And that is the problem, ML's management has treated this as a "land grab" hoping to own the AR market the same way some feel Apple owns the smartphone market. They instigated draconian NDA's and retained people to secrecy but in reality, no real "secret tech" existed. And the elephant in the room is that ML has been incapable of making the advances to reduce, to a portable size, the original tech for the demo that got them the funding - and their bluff has been called.

Their CEO tried to dance on a head of a pin and claim that rather than the original demo rig they will try and emulate a lesser version of AR (very similar to Hololens(6)) and this divergence started, even more, alarm bells ringing and forced ML to attend and demo at a specially convened board meeting, proving what they HAVE achieved thus far with the vast funds spent. If they show an HL style dev kit then there is a danger that investors will call a vote of no confidence and demand changes in management (sackings).

5.  6.

That is a very basic assessment of the situation as much as we can know without getting involved in information that could be covered under signed-NDA's. It's a mess, and why I have always been skeptical of the exec team since we met with them back in 2013/14. Any group that thinks that their TED conference "Spacesuits, Yeti's and Hersey bars"(7) presentation was acceptable is an operation that at the worst is into Snake Oil selling, and at the best delusional (and by the current legal actions seriously damaged internally).

7.

Look at the latest video presentation by ML's "wizard" at TEDX 2012 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8J5BWL8oJY&feature=youtu.be) to see that for a company this close to claiming to release dev kits, they are still deep in the weeds regarding reality-of-concept, and still highly delusional about their approach to the market.