The mixed reality gamble: How the big tech companies are placing their bets

Finding the next big thing is hard. Billions are spent and wasted every year in its pursuit. Even with these large resources most tech companies fail to strike on anything interesting and the cost of failure can be high in both dollars spent and reputation.  So how are these companies reacting to the potential future of mixed reality?

Finding the next big thing is hard. Billions are spent and wasted every year in its pursuit.  Even with these large resources most tech companies fail to strike on anything interesting. The amount spent and ink spilled on the smartwatch, for example, should have all but assured its success but other than the initial boost from all the PR, it has floundered in the market.  Companies are desperate for that next great thing but the cost of failure can be high in both dollars spent and reputation.  

Some believe the next big thing is Mixed Reality. Certainly, Magic Leap believe it. But this is by no means a sure thing. Even if the technology delivers on the expectations, the public might not be willing to bite.  Yet, it cannot be ignored.  Right now, all the major tech companies are placing their bets on the potential of an MR future.  Let’s take a look at where they are placing their chips. 


Microsoft is at the forefront of mixed reality with Hololens.  You can buy a development kit today and see exactly how it works and what it can do.  They have clearly sunk significant resource into the project and continue to push the technology forward.  But this has become somewhat more complicated in recent months when Microsoft announced Windows Holographic. In traditional Microsoft style, they are creating and hoping to license the operating system for a mixed reality headset. This will solve a large problem for OEMs wanting to make their own headset and positions Microsoft to profit regardless of who can create the best headset as long as it is running Windows Holographic.  

While this is a smart move regardless it does show a lack of faith in Hololens as a product.  I would speculate that they have hit certain road blocks with Hololens, in particular with resolution and field of view.  They know overcoming these will be challenging and potentially a large distraction from their current business.  Letting the rest of the market sort these issues out will save them that trouble.  

In either case, Microsoft is making a heavy bet on MR.  If it takes off they will be well positioned to influence and profit from the future of Mixed Reality.  

Magic Leap

Well this one is obvious.  They are betting the farm on their mixed reality headset to be a success. If it flops, so does the company. 

But is it really that simple?  Did they really convince investors to give that much money on such a risky gamble?  I think Magic Leap can be successful even if their headset flops. They own a number of fundamentally new technology whose applications will likely go beyond an MR headset. Not only that, they will have the only manufacturing line that is able to mass produce this technology.  You could envision building television or smartphone screens using the fiber scanning projector. The advanced optics could similarly be incorporated into car windscreens and VR products. They could licence the technology to other MR headsets perhaps using windows holographic. Magic Leap is betting on hardware in the same way that Microsoft is betting on software.  

With that in mind, I envision a potential future where Magic Leap’s headset flops and the internet explodes with “I told you so” articles about what a failure they are.  Meanwhile, they start raking in money from the licensing of their many technologies.  This has put me in the odd position of being cynical of potential future cynicism. So I’ll stop there.  


It could be argued that Google kicked off the current push for MR with Google Glass. Glass, while never seeing a consumer release, created huge excitement for the potential of the technology. When the product couldn’t deliver on expectations, that excitement soured.  But the original excitement was real. It showed companies like Microsoft and people like Rony Abovitz that the public is interested in this technology, if you can only deliver on the expectations people have. So while never being a consumer success we still have a lot to thank Glass for in terms of pushing technology forward.   

Fast forward to today and we see Google investing heavily in Magic Leap while simultaneously pursuing their own technology. Google has always been about creating technology for everyone as opposed to just the high end of the market and we see this in how they are looking at mixed reality. Project Tango is aiming to bring SLAM processing to any smartphone.  While projects like Soli hope to bring gesture recognition to a much smaller form factor.  By combining Daydream with Tango and Soli they could build a Google Cardboard like mixed reality headset that could introduce the world to the concept without the need to buy expensive hardware beyond what they already own.

With the stake that Google owns in Magic Leap, they could sit back and do nothing while MR takes off and still make a tidy profit off of it. Meanwhile they continue to be good technology citizens by fostering developers in this new field and pushing MR forward to the masses.  


No one knows what Apple is doing. They are certainly working on something, they would be crazy not to, but they won’t talk about it until it is ready to go.  If history is any tell, they will wait until others have tested the market. Apple tends look at what consumers see as pain points in an existing products and then bring out their own product addressing those issues. I don’t want to be too down on Apple but I just don’t believe they will bring anything to the table in the infancy of MR. They don’t have the same R&D as some of the other companies and tend to be far more conservative when bringing out new products. I would love to see Apple open up more and give back to the developer community by showing what they are working on but traditionally this is not something Apple does. We will just have to wait and see.

The Interface of the Future: How will we use Magic Leap?

With new technology comes new fundamental interface paradigms. We are currently in a rare moment where we can guess at what the next paradigm might be and where Magic Leap fits in.

With new technology comes new fundamental interface paradigms. These sorts of paradigms don’t change often and are intrinsically tied to hardware capabilities. As technology evolves, we tend to settle on a core interface that defines how developers build the products we come to love.  In the early days of computing, we used printers and punchcards.  Then, the mother of all demos showed us the future: the display, mouse and keyboard.  These are such powerful concepts that almost 50 years later we are still using them.  More recently, touchscreens, and in particular the capacitive touchscreen, have driven the smartphone revolution.  Wayne Westerman and John Elias brought these to the world and paved the way for companies like Apple and Google to build the modern smartphone.  

We are currently in a rare moment where we can see an approaching shift in technology. Outside of videogames, where Nintendo does something wacky every 5 years or so, it is hard to think of another time in recent memory when we saw this shift coming and had a time to ruminate on it before it emerged. 

Mixed Reality is one of these shifts.  In this post, I want to wildly speculate on what the core interface paradigm for this technology will be. How will we select information we care about? How will we input text? How do we navigate between different sections of the UI?  Of course, I am going to focus on Magic Leap but I want to start somewhere else.  Hololens.


Wait a minute. This isn’t an approaching shift in technology.  It is already here.  You can buy a hololens dev kit for $3000 and start playing with it today. We have a fully working and thought out interface for an MR product right now.  

 Expect to see a lot of this in the future
Expect to see a lot of this in the future

Kind of.

Hololens isn’t yet a consumer product.  It is a work in progress.  Hands on articles, videos and, seemingly, even Microsoft have all agreed that the technology is amazing but the product isn’t quite ready for consumer release.  That said the interface seems to be fairly well thought out and I think Magic Leap will operate in a similar way.  

HoloLens uses the position and orientation of a user’s head, not their eyes, to determine their gaze vector

Hololens has 3 forms of interaction: gaze, gesture and voice.  To broadly put these in a context of how we use technology today we can think of gaze as similar to a mouse, gestures as similar to mouse buttons and voice behaves like the keyboard.  

I worry about these interaction paradigms.  We all know how annoying voice interaction is to use. We’ve all tried Siri and Google Now and then decided not to use them except if very rare situations.  If the Wii/Kinect/Playstation Move proved anything it is that gesture based input tends to be terrible. The reason we get annoyed using voice input and gestures is an issue of feedback.  Voice input is slow.  You don’t know if the system is correctly picking up the words you are saying until you are done saying them. Even if it works 90% of the time, the 10% that it doesn’t is so frustrating that you give up on it entirely. Gestures have the same problem. It can be hard to tell if the system has actually registered your gesture or if it is just slow to load in this instance. A mouse and keyboard would suffer the same issues if they were as unreliable but they tend to be the most responsive part of a computer. You know your computer is really struggling when you can type faster than the characters are being displayed. Gaze, on the other hand, is less proven and perhaps has the most potential.

Magic Leap

So what else can we do? Honestly, I have no idea. Gaze, Gesture and Voice are the most obvious way to approach this problem and I expect Magic Leap to utilize them. Perhaps the only thing they can do is try to make these inputs as reliable as a mouse or keyboard. We see hints of this already. Magic Leap needs to do frame by frame, highly accurate eye tracking to achieve a light field display. This can be used for the gaze portion of the UI. I imagine you will simply have to look at something to select it in some way. We can already do this today. There is a company today called Tobii that has built eye tracking for your laptop.

This shows what is available to consumers today but in quite a different form factor.  Given Magic Leap will be far closer to the eye I would speculate they might be able to do a better job than Tobii.  If it is highly accurate it may have the same reliability as the mouse and alleviate any concerns for the gaze section of the interface. 

Of course you don’t want to select everything you look at so gaze will have to be combined with a gesture likely similar to Hololens “airtap”. This seems to be confirmed in the patent images which list a number of gesture interactions.

Gesture and voice input are problems that many companies have put huge resources in already.  I don’t imagine Magic Leap will improve drastically on the status quo.  In fact, there is a decent chance they will be worse at solving these problems in the first iteration than other companies.  I think this will be okay, as long as they can nail at least one gesture.  They need the airtap gesture to work.  I imagine this is the primary way we will interact with objects around us. If this is unreliable then the system will be frustrating to use regardless of anything else.

The patent image above shows another important interaction and that is the home button. It is easy to get lost in a UI.  Things like the start button on Windows or the home button on smartphones are vital to be able to find your way back somewhere familiar.  


Magic Leap’s patent documentation talks extensively about totems. 

“[Totems are] Physical objects which are manipulable by the user to allow input or interaction with the AR system. These physical objects are referred to herein as totems. Some totems may take the form of inanimate objects, for example a piece of metal or plastic, a wall, a surface of table. Alternatively, some totems may take the form of animate objects, for example a hand of the user.”

From this description a totems can be just about anything at all that is recognized by Magic Leap. Many totems described are blank slates. Simple objects that are given life by projecting holograms on them.  One such example is a blank rectangle on which a keyboard is projected. Another is a blank mouse. Since the dimensions and properties are known quantities it may allow for simpler recognition of gestures pertaining to the totem.  

 A squishy keyboard totem.  Remember the keys might not actually be there but just be holograms on a squishy slab.
A squishy keyboard totem.  Remember the keys might not actually be there but just be holograms on a squishy slab.

The point of totems seems to be the ability to give physical presence to holograms. They are described as empty shells, useless shapes, that are only useful when the context of a hologram is projected on to them.  One example is particularly interesting.  The patent document outlines how a blank piece of aluminum becomes a smartphone.  

“[T]he AR system may render the user interface of an Android phone onto a surface of an aluminum sheet. The AR system may detect interaction with the rendered virtual user interface, for instance via a front facing camera, and implement functions based on the detected interactions.”

So, you heard it here first folks. Your next smartphone might be a slab of aluminum.  

Wild Speculation

Magic Leap is not one to go down the path most travelled.  So what are they doing that might be crazy, out there and line up with some of the “GPU of the brain” type talk we keep hearing from them?  There is one line in the patent that implies an entirely different interface to what has been described thus far. They are building a device that sits on your head.  It might be the first time a company can reasonable build an EEG into their product.  From the patent:

“[T]he system may measure neurological signals and use that as an input for the system. The system may have a sensor that tracks brain signals and map it against a table of commands. In other words, the user input is simply the user’s thoughts, that may be measured by the user’s brain signals. This may also be referred to as subvocalization sensing. Such a system may also include apparatus for sensing EEG data to translate the user’s “thoughts” into brain signals that may be decipherable by the system.”

It is positioned as almost an afterthought in the patent so I don’t think they are actually trying to implement “subvocalization sensing”. Well, at least not in the first iteration.