Why the $3000 price tag for HoloLens is smart.
Earlier this week, during the devices event for Microsoft, they unveiled that they would be selling HoloLens developer kits for $3000. And, all of a sudden people are back on the "bitching about the FoV" bandwagon.
Personally, as I've said in the past, Microsoft should have abandoned any attempts to go untethered for V1 of the product or offer alternate models which had increased visible range. The immersion is what makes or breaks this as a magical device.
But, that is behind us now, and I doubt Microsoft can seriously make that happen now in the time between the present and when they finally start selling these units.
Given that, I think they've done the best thing possible. They have on numerous occasions said that this is NOT meant for the average consumer... YET. So, any bitching or quibbling about the FoV on a $3K device that only comes in "development kit" form is idiotic.
That is 3 things that say "FUCK OFF THIS ISN'T A PRODUCT". Anything not generally available to the broader consumer spectrum is NOT a product. Anything only sold under the guise of being aimed at a specific industry (developers in this case) is NOT a product. And anything priced, intentionally or otherwise out of the reach of consumers who might be interested is NOT a product. THIS (at present) IS A TOOL. And in that capacity, the FoV is perfectly fine.
Microsoft made reference hardware for Windows Phones in the earlier days and developers got these. Yet, no one bitched about what features they did or didn't have. And they didn't for the simple reason that they weren't meant as competitive consumer devices. The same goes for the way they are marketing HoloLens.
YES, people who aren't developers or who may have no serious intention of developing for this device may buy it. But I think that would largely be a silly move unless you have money to burn. The lofty price tag for that device will be footed by industries keen on using it as a tool, or those interested in building for when a consumer viable model is ready.
The price tag is clearly meant, at the moment, as a deterrent. It also likely means they are actually selling them at a profit.
Bottom line. If you comment on HoloLens' field of view at the moment, you're painting yourself as quite stupid. You're not buying this product. And chances are, neither is anyone you know. And Microsoft doesn't care if you don't buy it. In fact, they would probably rather you didn't.
If the FoV continues to be a problem when a future iteration goes on sale targeted at consumers (and likely in the $1500 or less price range) THEN you can tear them a new a hole over the FoV.
Frankly, it makes a lot more sense to comment on their strategy on the whole rather than on the device. I think they should kept their mouths shut. Unveiling this device while they were still years away from a consumer model has prompted Google (which already have a rather limited concept AR device) and Apple to start looking at this industry. Not to mention Occulus and other VR companies as well.
Part of that motivation clearly came as a result of how the industry reacted to Microsoft's proposed product. Which is to say... the press LOVED it. Pretty much every action around purchasing AR tech or getting serious about pursuing it came AFTER Microsoft revealed HoloLens. It is HIGHLY unlikely that this is coincidental. And now, Microsoft runs the risk of being late to a party they effectively created.
A large chunk of HoloLens' biggest problem was being unveiled with no information and a ton of demos that were consumer focused while not setting expectations of any kind around who the first devices would be targeted at, or what the cost would be. People are bitching about the FoV because people still haven't broken that initial impression that the units we're looking at *should* be consumer products. And Microsoft is to blame for that perception.
Still, the complaints bother me because they are being made by journalists who follow Microsoft and are perfectly aware by now that you aren't going to be seeing these in Microsoft stores, and you may need to jump through hoops just to be able to pay that whopping $3000 to get your hands on a unit. These aren't the sort of people who should be expecting the things a consumer should be expecting out of this product. Because they KNOW it isn't a consumer product right now.
Anyway, I don't think many average consumers even know about HoloLens. And I think by limiting distribution to their partner development channels and having a $3K price tag will keep it out of the hands of most consumers. Which should mean very little bad press around the field of view that will taint potential future customers for a version of the device they might actually be able to get their hands on.
The only gamble now is on their competition not beating them to punchline.
Personally, as I've said in the past, Microsoft should have abandoned any attempts to go untethered for V1 of the product or offer alternate models which had increased visible range. The immersion is what makes or breaks this as a magical device.
But, that is behind us now, and I doubt Microsoft can seriously make that happen now in the time between the present and when they finally start selling these units.
Given that, I think they've done the best thing possible. They have on numerous occasions said that this is NOT meant for the average consumer... YET. So, any bitching or quibbling about the FoV on a $3K device that only comes in "development kit" form is idiotic.
That is 3 things that say "FUCK OFF THIS ISN'T A PRODUCT". Anything not generally available to the broader consumer spectrum is NOT a product. Anything only sold under the guise of being aimed at a specific industry (developers in this case) is NOT a product. And anything priced, intentionally or otherwise out of the reach of consumers who might be interested is NOT a product. THIS (at present) IS A TOOL. And in that capacity, the FoV is perfectly fine.
Microsoft made reference hardware for Windows Phones in the earlier days and developers got these. Yet, no one bitched about what features they did or didn't have. And they didn't for the simple reason that they weren't meant as competitive consumer devices. The same goes for the way they are marketing HoloLens.
YES, people who aren't developers or who may have no serious intention of developing for this device may buy it. But I think that would largely be a silly move unless you have money to burn. The lofty price tag for that device will be footed by industries keen on using it as a tool, or those interested in building for when a consumer viable model is ready.
The price tag is clearly meant, at the moment, as a deterrent. It also likely means they are actually selling them at a profit.
Bottom line. If you comment on HoloLens' field of view at the moment, you're painting yourself as quite stupid. You're not buying this product. And chances are, neither is anyone you know. And Microsoft doesn't care if you don't buy it. In fact, they would probably rather you didn't.
If the FoV continues to be a problem when a future iteration goes on sale targeted at consumers (and likely in the $1500 or less price range) THEN you can tear them a new a hole over the FoV.
Frankly, it makes a lot more sense to comment on their strategy on the whole rather than on the device. I think they should kept their mouths shut. Unveiling this device while they were still years away from a consumer model has prompted Google (which already have a rather limited concept AR device) and Apple to start looking at this industry. Not to mention Occulus and other VR companies as well.
Part of that motivation clearly came as a result of how the industry reacted to Microsoft's proposed product. Which is to say... the press LOVED it. Pretty much every action around purchasing AR tech or getting serious about pursuing it came AFTER Microsoft revealed HoloLens. It is HIGHLY unlikely that this is coincidental. And now, Microsoft runs the risk of being late to a party they effectively created.
A large chunk of HoloLens' biggest problem was being unveiled with no information and a ton of demos that were consumer focused while not setting expectations of any kind around who the first devices would be targeted at, or what the cost would be. People are bitching about the FoV because people still haven't broken that initial impression that the units we're looking at *should* be consumer products. And Microsoft is to blame for that perception.
Still, the complaints bother me because they are being made by journalists who follow Microsoft and are perfectly aware by now that you aren't going to be seeing these in Microsoft stores, and you may need to jump through hoops just to be able to pay that whopping $3000 to get your hands on a unit. These aren't the sort of people who should be expecting the things a consumer should be expecting out of this product. Because they KNOW it isn't a consumer product right now.
Anyway, I don't think many average consumers even know about HoloLens. And I think by limiting distribution to their partner development channels and having a $3K price tag will keep it out of the hands of most consumers. Which should mean very little bad press around the field of view that will taint potential future customers for a version of the device they might actually be able to get their hands on.
The only gamble now is on their competition not beating them to punchline.
Comments
Post a Comment