What is Magic Leap really?
Magic Leap was banking on fiber scanning displays. The technology, however, turns out to be not ready yet, and likely not for at least 5 years.
So what are they using? We know this, based on all the leaks and info given out. They’re using a waveguide (like HoloLens, Lumus, Vuzix, Epson, etc.). They’re likely going to use LCOS (like HoloLens). They may use micro-OLEDs (like Epson) but probably LCOS for its low price, high brightness, and small size. Famed analyst Ming-Chi Kuo reports that Magic Leap will use Himax LCOS displays (likely an unreleased 1080p version).
An issue with using waveguides is that they’ll only give a relatively low field of view. Lumus has a state-of-the-art 55 degree FOV waveguide. While the FOV will continue to grow, it will probably not be as large or larger than Meta’s FOV (which they claim to be 90 degrees) for a few years. It’ll be better than HoloLens (gen 1) which has only around 30 degrees but nothing mindblowing.
How are they going to differentiate? Multiple fields of focus. They plan to use multiple waveguides stacked on top of each other to enable that. However, that’ll make the waveguides significantly thicker than they already are. Also, if they want multiple focus depths at the same time, they’ll sacrifice frame rates. Most likely, they’ll use eye tracking to figure out what field depth to project at based on where you’re looking, to maximize frame rate.
For processing, they’ll split it out to two packs, in your pocket, or more likely strapped to your hip since heat is apparently such a big issue. Battery pack and processing pack. They’ll likely use a Snapdragon, or whichever is top of the line when they release. Not only will using ARM over x86 save on power but it will allow them to leverage the foundations of Android or whatever microkernel that Google creates in the future to further save power and have fast accurate spatial mapping.
All that processing is going to go to 3D spatial mapping of your environment and of your hand. HoloLens currently has the best algorithms for this and even a custom-built silicon chip to handle it. This will be an important component for any AR device. Magic Leap could make an equivalent or better system in theory, but Microsoft certainly has the lead with the best system and it will be difficult to pass them in the near-future if you’re just a startup.
So what does Magic Leap appear to be in the end? What makes them unique and competitive? Not all that much, it seems. If you tear away the veil of hype that Rony is a master of, they have no competitive advantage currently. They have no unique qualities or technologies that their competition does not have or cannot catch up to in short order. Microsoft is the leader in AR right now and is best positioned to lead even when Magic Leap finally releases version 1.
Rony wants to be a “Baby Apple”, but you can’t be like Apple if you release Yet Another Waveguide. The iPhone wasn’t a BlackBerry or a Treo. It was something entirely different that hadn’t yet been conceived (except for crude attempts by others that went silently into the night). Magic Leap will not succeed against a juggernaut like Microsoft if they release a modified HoloLens. Microsoft certainly knows that you can’t just release YAW, as they’ve now decided to skip version 2 and go straight to version 3 of HoloLens with far superior technology for a 2019–2020 release. I wouldn’t be surprised if Magic Leap wanted to do the same. Unfortunately for them, it may be too late to catch up to competitors’ traction by then, even if investors are willing to give them time to perfect their first release.
How could Magic Leap catch up? By releasing something amazing. But all indicators point to no significant competitive advantages and the FSD will likely not be production ready in only 2–3 years at such a disorganized startup as Magic Leap.
I could, however, imagine them releasing an equivalent competitor to HoloLens. They could gain some traction that way. I am not saying it’s impossible. But even if they miraculously did manage to get on their feet against the competitors they will have at release time, they face a far bigger threat.
Apple and Samsung will likely dominate consumer AR in the 2020’s, if not beyond. Why? It’s simple: they have traction, money, and technology. Let me expand on these.
