Comment Re:A Better Technology Already Exists: Microvision (Score 1) 175
I'm not sure if this is the company you spoke of, but the technology sounds a lot like that of Microvision, which happens to be Seattle-based.
http://www.mvis.com/
These guys are researching and producing what they call "Virtual Retinal Displays" which project the image directly onto the retina using a low-power laser. I've seen claims that this technology will eventually produce resolutions unlike anything you've seen in conventional displays.
Some other big advantages: The product can be used as a heads-up display (transparent) and the laser-based displays are daylight readable. IBM's TV commercial shows a guy using the display on a park bench, but the small amount of literature I've read from IBM suggests that the display is NOT daylight-readable. Yick! I hope that's not true. As someone pointed out in an earlier post, the display in the commercial also looks nothing like the clunky device that is pictured in the one you've already seen in the news article here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsi
Microvision appears to be primarily targeting the high-margin markets right now, specifically military, avionics (virtual cockpit), and medical tech. I hope they eventually create a low-cost consumer model based on the same technology. Maybe the current, rather clunky displays from IBM and others will help build the market segment to a volume that makes it possible.
Oh, and will people be willing to use it? Some will be scared to at first, just like some people were afraid to cook with microwave ovens during their introduction. 'nuff said.
On a different note, keep in mind that wearables are not intended to replace desktops. They are intended, like palm organizers, to be used when you can't use a desktop. Coupled with a high-speed portable/wireless internet connection they could make information access a whole lot nicer for some mobile users. Getting a few lines displayed on your web-enabled phone is fine, but if you want to read large documents, I'd prefer the hi-res wearable. If it's made small enough to integrate into the pair of corrective glasses I already wear and if I can afford to actually buy one, then I'll be in heaven.
The interface doesn't have to be as good as the desktop. It might not be useful for what you want to do with it (everything), but it is good enough, even with the existing interfaces, for many tasks. Comparing wearables to desktops is like comparing PDAs to desktops or mice to voice recognition. It shouldn't be done. Remember: think supplement, not replacement.
