Magic Leap – The reality gap pt II.

Device pays the hype price.

• There is nothing wrong with the Magic Leap One when compared to its peers, but relative to what Magic Leap promised, the device is very disappointing.
• This is the problem with failing to appropriately manage expectations as the general opinion of this device is now not as good as I think it should be.
• Comparing the Magic Leap one to HoloLens is the right comparison to make and in this context, it holds up reasonably well.
• Graphics, performance and price are all pretty comparable but RFM research indicates that HoloLens has better and more depths of focus and it also has the advantage of not having to have a hip mounted computer pack.
• Despite this, the technology press appears to be pretty disappointed as a result of the product performing as I expected rather than as the company had promised.
• Phrases like “didn’t blow me away” (CNET), “little more than a novelty” (WSJ) and “not the kind of revolutionary (or downright magical) advance that Magic Leap has teased for years” (The Verge) are typical of the statements that I have read.
• These reactions are a result of the promises that were made when the company was raising vast sums of money rather than specific problems with the device itself.
• Some even went so far as to ask where all the money went which I think is a little unfair.
• Its main competitor in this space is Microsoft which I suspect has also spent vast (billions) sums of money on its product but because the body corporate is so massive, one can never see it in the numbers.
• Hence, I suspect that Microsoft (and now Apple) have spent as much if not more than Magic Leap and continue to invest very large amounts of money in this technology.
• This is not a huge surprise as the technical challenges involved in getting augmented reality to work well are substantial.
• Consequently, I think that the negative press the device is getting is little unfair, but it is entirely of the company’s making.
• The net result is a device that has a good chance of being competitive in the market place, but to do that it will need to pivot towards the enterprise in the short to medium term.
• This is because the enterprise use case is much more tolerant of a poor user experience and hardware that needs refining as long as there is a productivity use case.
• This is why almost all demand for AR is currently to be found in the enterprise and it is extremely unlikely that demand from the consumer will materialize before the technical challenges are solved.
• I think that this will take some considerable time, and in the meantime, Magic Leap will need to address the enterprise if it wants to begin making some money.
• I see Magic Leap as a viable contender in AR but it will be a while before it lives down the promises that it made but failed to keep.