A revolution in augmented reality they said

VR is better for that, imagine not having to pay for cubicles or large offices, just put a headset on and stack employees as efficiently as possible.

Attached: C0289551-Slave_ship_diagram,_19th_century.jpg (530x235, 180K)

>they're in it for the business applications 5-10 years from now

if theyre investing long term in this technology, they would be smarter to invest in facebook/apple. Not some crackpot fly-by-night company that pops up out of no-where and is so secretive that you don't know anything at all or have a roadmap/proof of concept.

They won't have to leave their homes this way. Everyone will just sit in their 4 m^2 room all day, sipping from municipal onions taps.

Not sure you understand how venture capital works, the kind of people who invested in Magic Leap are the kind of people that are invested in 10+ startups, if they don't get a return on investment on one of the startups they might make substantial profit after share vesting, when they sell shares they buy them off the company at the vested rate which is usually more than 10 times the value and often far, far more. Crackpot fly-by-night companies have far greater growth potential than large companies like Apple and Facebook.

>so secretive that you don't know anything at all or have a roadmap/proof of concept.
You don't know that, VC's get updates from the board of directors regularly, just because it's not customer focused press releases doesn't mean they don't have a roadmap.

I work in an insurance software startup and it's basically the job of the executives to meme their way to a tangible product.

What is this and why is it doing what microsoft hololens already does but very poorly?

I've used a hololens unit and the tracking is almost perfect, even comparable to my rift.

Why was the Nintendo Wii game controller [primary selling point of the console] worse with IR bar assistance than a Logitech Air mouse advertised as presenter office thing without any IR bar?

Shitty engineering, that's why.

What are you talking about? The IR tracking of the Wiimote was perfect. The only problem with the Wiimote is that it didn't include a gyroscope, since that was expensive as fuck in 2006, but instead had only one accelerometer. The Wiimote plus and the Switch controllers are far better since they do include a gyroscope, accelerometer and other sensors in them.

what the fuck. maybe those millions went to unnecessary endeavors.

>I work in an insurance software startup and it's basically the job of the executives to meme their way to a tangible product.

Well if that is true, then perhaps you are right. I'm just going off my own common sense thought process here. But, you make some good points.. But the amount of money this company got for how little they had in proven track record history seems moreso a consequence of dishonest pre-release footage rather than actual smart investment (or smart risky investment)

Dishonest pre-release footage is how startups raise investment. Startups have an idea to sell not a product, our CEO was promising features only possible with literally years of development but these people operate on a different wavelength, they are only interested in what the idea can bring 5-10 years from now. That's the venture capital game and if you play it right you can get silly amounts of investment without diluting the control of the company. I worked on the sales decks and execs were pretty much lying and memeing their way to investment, anyone who tells you that a company needs a tangible product to raise investment has no idea how the business scene works, it's the idea which sells and the implementation that comes after investment.

Just wait until Apple steps in.

This, investors are just looking for a lie good enough to draw in more suckers so that they can sell at a profit and get out before the company tanks.

Yup, although the company is impossible to tank even if the CEO is selling shares as they'll just pay what they need to fix the problem to get a new CEO who will raise the share price regardless.

Attached: 1350523102372.jpg (2000x1333, 1.58M)

>company founded in 2010
>has yet to release a single product
>company is worth over $4.5 billion USD

Any investors who falls for this shit deserves to get burned. The company was a blatant scam from the start. Tech doesn't magically appear out of thin air, so when anyone makes claims of having technology that isn't derived from any existing research, it's clearly just investor bait.