Four years ago, Microsoft surprised us with HoloLens, its standalone augmented reality headset. At the time, HoloLens was yet another target for Universal Windows Apps (UWPs), albeit it an admittedly unique one. But despite the slow uptake failure of Microsoft’s modern apps platform, and the failure of some of the device types that supported it, HoloLens has endured, and it’s found great success in certain vertical markets. Those successes, no doubt, influenced the direction that Microsoft took for this new version of the device, called HoloLens 2.
And to be clear, HoloLens is a success, with hundreds of thousands of users across many industries.
Sign up for our new free newsletter to get three time-saving tips each Friday — and get free copies of Paul Thurrott's Windows 11 and Windows 10 Field Guides (normally $9.99) as a special welcome gift!
"*" indicates required fields
Many believe that I’m no fan of HoloLens because I’ve criticized its narrow field of view, which I’ve likened to a mail slot. That’s not fair, actually, or accurate: Yes, the field of view is an issue. But the central point of HoloLens—its ability to fool your eyes and mind into rooting virtual objects that Microsoft calls holograms into your perception of the real world—is so successful that it can be described as magic. That’s job one, and I’ve always thought that improving the field of view was just a technical challenge that Microsoft would assuredly fix in subsequent revisions.
And here we are.
Well, sort of. You may have heard that Microsoft originally planned to ship a second-generation HoloLens headset two years ago, and that the software giant canceled that revision because it was too small an update. The version we’re seeing today for the first time is thus technically the third version, but however you choose to describe its lineage, it is indeed a worthy successor to the original, and it comes with key improvements to address some current challenges.
HoloLens 2 correctly adopts the ARM-based Qualcomm Snapdragon platform, which, unlike with PCs, comes with absolutely no downside at all. HoloLens only runs UWP apps anyway, and those apps can be made to work on ARM somewhat effortlessly. This lets the new HoloLens take advantage of the Snapdragon’s core strengths vs. Intel hardware—like battery longevity—without compromise. Windows 10 on ARM may or may not eventually make sense on PCs. But it absolutely makes sense on HoloLens.
There are some form factor changes, which were leaked ahead of Microsoft’s announcement, resulting in a smaller, lighter, and more comfortable design. This new design is much lighter, much more comfortable, and has much better weight distribution.
But there are bigger, more substantive changes too.
Key among them is a feature I actually first revealed a few weeks back, that HoloLens supports what I called “hand tracking.” It works in tandem with another new feature, eye tracking, making it easier and more natural for users to interact with virtual objects without needing to use complicated controllers. Instead, they can simply use their hands, more naturally. They can “feel” holograms and interact with them directly.
Also key is that field of view issue. And sure enough, Microsoft has doubled the field of view in HoloLens 2 while retaining the resolution and quality of the original device. It’s basically two 2K displays, and represents a “generational leap” over the original, Microsoft says.
HoloLens 2 is also customizable via the HoloLens Customization Program so that companies can create special versions of the product that meet their unique needs. As an example, a construction company designed a version of HoloLens 2 with a built-in hardhat so that it can be used on-site during construction projects.
Finally, HoloLens 2 is significantly less expensive than its predecessor, though it’s still quite expensive. The standalone enterprise bundle is about $3500, down from $5000. And you can basically subscribe to the hardware for $150 per month.
But it’s clear now, too, that Microsoft does have a plan to bring HoloLens and its AR capabiltiies to consumers at some point. A surprise appearance by Epic CEO Tim Sweeney, a long-time critic of Microsoft and its online store, was perhaps even more notable for his promise that all of Epic’s endeavors would one day be enabled on HoloLens. Epic is, of course, a game maker.
Before that, HoloLens 2 will serve the same growing group of vertical markets in which its predecessor has found success. And based on what we saw today, that success is only going to grow.
I’m looking forward to trying out HoloLens 2.
dontbe evil
<blockquote><em><a href="#406908">In reply to eshy:</a></em></blockquote><p>yup Paul and the rest of consumers can still play with AR toy and emoji on $2k ios/android phone/tablets</p>
dontbe evil
<blockquote><a href="#407024" target="_blank"><em>In reply to locust infested orchard inc:</em></a></blockquote><p>I appreciate, but don't worry iSheeps and gSheeps, are like this, they can hear only about their beloved companies… when is about MS they hate the truth and get angry and jelous </p>
BrianEricFord
<blockquote><em><a href="#406948">In reply to WP7Mango:</a></em></blockquote><p><br></p><p>Reasonable people can quibble with whether it’s a success but it’s not reasonable or correct to correlate “no one else is in the market” with “success”.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#406948">In reply to WP7Mango:</a></em></blockquote><p>When you say "holographic" I'm guessing you mean 3D. It's understandable since almost everything described a hologram these days isn't one.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#407212">In reply to WP7Mango:</a></em></blockquote><p>"Generating" holograms in realtime? You do realize that a hologram is a physical object not an image?</p><p><br></p><p>Update: You're right and I'm wrong in the sense that holograms are involved, but they are just acting as micro-prisms. They don't play any direct role in making the images 3D. The 3D effect is still primarily achieved by stereoscopic technique. </p><p><br></p><p>In a conventional hologram, the 3D characteristics are the result of the re-creation of the wave front of reflected light from the original objects being "photographed". The image also exhibits parallax so that a viewer can see around objects in the foreground to see blocked objects in the background by changing their viewing position. When holograms are mentioned in the context of 3D, these are the characteristics that are fundamental.</p>
dontbe evil
<blockquote><em><a href="#407140">In reply to wftw2016:</a></em></blockquote><p>epic win</p>
skane2600
<p><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">"And to be clear, HoloLens </span><em style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">is</em><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"> a success, with hundreds of thousands of users across many industries."</span></p><p><br></p><p><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><span class="ql-cursor"></span></span>So, considerably less successful than the Windows Phone.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#406935">In reply to curtisspendlove:</a></em></blockquote><p>I was being flippant, but on it's own having "hundreds of thousands of users" doesn't necessarily indicate success. </p>
BrianEricFord
<blockquote><em><a href="#407003">In reply to skane2600:</a></em></blockquote><p><br></p><p>Yep. Would be interesting to hear how many of those hundreds of thousands of purchasers are still active users.</p><p><br></p><p>I bet its tens of thousands, if that.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#407462">In reply to NoFlames:</a></em></blockquote><p>I get it, but we don't have numbers for any of those things or know what percentage of enterprise users would go beyond the device itself. Sometimes executives like to play around with the latest toys even if they have no plan for using them. I can't prove it, but I suspect that this behavior was behind some of the initial uptake of iPads in the enterprise where the company never replaced most of their PCs or Macs with iPads.</p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#406943">In reply to StevenLayton:</a></em></blockquote><p>I intended it to be more of a benchmark of failure to compare everything else against. </p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#406965">In reply to BShaw:</a></em></blockquote><p>So, how much profit has it made? You know revenue – R&D costs – materials costs -manufacturing costs – advertising costs. </p>
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#407097">In reply to RM:</a></em></blockquote><p>Yes, but market size itself can be a factor in determining the success or failure of a product. Some ideas (no matter who implements them) aren't popular enough to be sustainable. That was the case with 3D TV.</p>
BrianEricFord
<blockquote><em><a href="#406955">In reply to lordbaal1:</a></em></blockquote><p><br></p><p>Yeah. Between that, and somehow deeming V1 a success because hundreds of thousands have sold — given the way he constantly talks about the “failures” of other company’s products that measure in the many millions — it’s kinda hard to take the opinion seriously.</p><p><br></p><p>i guess those other companies should just claim something is an “enterprise” product and wallow in their sudden turnaround to astronomical success.</p>
dontbe evil
<p>meanwhile already fr 4 year "tech giants" like apple, google and samung … can only look at the hololens, they have NOTHING comparable</p>
dontbe evil
<blockquote><em><a href="#407034">In reply to locust infested orchard inc:</a></em></blockquote><p>ah I forgot they can play AR on their small screen toys with animoji</p>