Augmented reality is beginning to leak out into the mainstream world. This is thanks, in part, to ARKit and ARCore making their debuts this year. These releases turned the current smartphones owned by millions of Apple and Android users into AR-capable machines. Within a few short weeks, some of the most talked about apps in Apple’s App Store were AR apps.
While there are definitely some awesome use cases for mobile AR, the real future in AR is headworn. Unfortunately, we won’t likely see that day until AR head-mounted displays shed about 70% of their current mass. So at this point, we have to wait on the hardware manufacturers and Moore’s Law to do their job and continue to help miniaturize the technology needed for AR HMDs to make the impact we know they will.
In the meantime, we do have other kinds of head-mounted AR headsets, and maybe they aren’t something we can use on the go, but they do offer some of the functionality that users want. However, since most of these devices are primarily targeting software developers (in a bid to seed AR app marketplaces for end users), the devices are still missing a good bit of the software that could make them more popular with mainstream users. So if you’re an early adopter—but not a software developer—you might be a bit confused as to which AR headset is right for you.
With that in mind, we’re going to break down the big differences between the most notable headsets out there: Microsoft’s HoloLens, the Meta 2, and the Magic Leap One: Creator’s Edition
HoloLens
The Microsoft HoloLens is without a doubt the highest profile augmented reality head-mounted display on the market. That status could be due to the marketing efforts of Microsoft, or it could be related to the simple fact that nothing else currently on the market has a comparable feature set (a point some might debate). Regardless, Microsoft has taken a massive step into the world of spatial computing with the HoloLens, leaving some large footprints behind for everyone else to follow.
As a standalone headworn computer capable of projecting images that appear to be in the real world, the HoloLens is the first of its kind. With a collection of sensors and cameras, the HoloLens is constantly scanning the space around the user and updating a 3D mesh of that area in what is referred to as a spatial map.
,
,
There’s a valid argument regarding the notion that, due to it being a tethered device, the Meta 2 really shouldn’t be compared to the HoloLens or Magic Leap. But currently, the product category is somewhat loose due to the low number of devices on the market. As the market fills out, these products will slot off into their own sub-categories. In other words, for now, as long as they are head-mounted electronic devices with see-through displays, they will be compared.
Magic Leap
Though incessantly hyped for several years, the newest company to show us an AR head-mounted product is Magic Leap, with the Magic Leap One: Creator’s Edition. This headset hasn’t actually been released yet, so, in a sense, it’s just more hype at this point. That said, we have a full break down of what we currently know about the hardware. But here we’ll take what we know and put it in context in terms of what it has to offer in comparison to the HoloLens and the Meta 2.
In some ways, the Magic Leap One is a bridge between the HoloLens and the Meta 2. The headset is tethered, though not in the way the Meta 2 is. A cable connects the HMD to a small hip-mounted computer that handles the primary data and graphics processing. This could be a big turn off for some consumers (although the consensus around the Next Reality office is that it wouldn’t be a bother for most of us).
,
,
Between the Magic Leap One’s tethered brain and the company’s choice of light fields for near-eye optics, the headset is much smaller than the HoloLens and the Meta 2. As a result, the device looks great. It’s much closer to the size of a pair of glasses than its competitors. That said, the device is still likely too far out there in terms of visual design for some of the pickiest computer users.
And with the device’s smaller size came a big trade-off: accessibility to all. Unlike the HoloLens and Meta 2, the Magic Leap One does not directly accommodate people who wear corrective lenses. While the unit can be fitted with the prescription lenses a user might need, the HoloLens and Meta 2 both offer the ability to be used with glasses right out of the box. That seems like a pretty big deal, since roughly 75% of the US adult population use corrective lenses.
Another feature that comes as a result of Magic Leap’s decision to use light fields for optics is something sorely missing from the HoloLens and Meta 2: depth of field. The ability to blur and focus virtual objects will give them more presence in our world when using the device.
,
Source: Next Reality