<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>AndrewKemendo</author><text>&lt;i&gt;AR applications already provide concrete added value in construction where you can overlay the digital model with the site for inspections and such&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;You say that, but we built the leading product for this in 2014 (Visidraft) and AEC still isn&amp;#x27;t ready in 2018 for this for a host of reasons.&lt;p&gt;Forgetting for a moment that 99% of these applications are on tablets and phones - which is still too difficult to manage for most AEC firms - the problems inherent in the lack of infrastructure to solve the 3D content management, object localization, user collaboration and markup management are still unsolved. Not technically mind you, but in business processes and workflow.&lt;p&gt;Add HMD to that and you cut the market deployment by 1&amp;#x2F;1000th. So a demo here or there from DAQRI or Hololens does not prove the value of it being a serious and concrete product.&lt;p&gt;Beyond that though, the biggest problem was that it ends up providing the most value as a sales&amp;#x2F;collab tool between clients and developers, and we constantly heard that architects didn&amp;#x27;t want to use it because it put too much power into the client&amp;#x27;s hand. Imagine that.&lt;p&gt;So I&amp;#x27;m not sure where you&amp;#x27;re getting the &amp;quot;provide concrete added value.&amp;quot; Show me the successful product - not a demo, or a pilot product, but one that is generating profit at scale and is integrated into an entire business process at a firm like Gensler (one of our clients previously).&lt;p&gt;It&amp;#x27;s a theoretically great use case, but in practice, it requires too much from the user to make it work as a stable product.&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.architectmagazine.com&amp;#x2F;videos&amp;#x2F;visidraft-augmented-reality-for-visualizing-cad-designs&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.architectmagazine.com&amp;#x2F;videos&amp;#x2F;visidraft-augmented...&lt;/a&gt;</text><parent_chain><item><author>fsloth</author><text>AR applications already provide concrete added value in construction where you can overlay the digital model with the site for inspections and such.&lt;p&gt;I would see Magic Leap falls to same category as hololens - which is used for real work in the construction industry - but only on a more affordable price point.&lt;p&gt;The key question is how easy it is to develop applications for it. Hololens basically consumes unity apps which makes it a pretty easy for development and deployment.</text></item><item><author>Guest9812398</author><text>As always with Magic Leap, I&amp;#x27;m still not seeing a single compelling use case. Sea turtles swimming around the air, or a T-rex on the desk is fun for a few minutes, but it&amp;#x27;s not worth the price of entry. At this point, I&amp;#x27;ve lost all faith in their vision. After years of following their posts, they haven&amp;#x27;t demonstrated a single thing of value.&lt;p&gt;What are they expecting now? They honestly think developers are going to flock to this device with no audience for $2,250 and produce groundbreaking applications and games that will sell millions of Magic Leaps to consumers to recover their investment?&lt;p&gt;Why don&amp;#x27;t they take that 2.5 billion dollars, and prove a single application or game &lt;i&gt;can&lt;/i&gt; be developed for this product that people will line up to buy? If they can&amp;#x27;t do it with unlimited money, almost a decade of time, and the future of their business depending on it, then why do they expect some random developers are going to pay money to do it for them?&lt;p&gt;I know this post sounds negative, but I&amp;#x27;m 100% convinced this product will be dead on arrival and nothing more than a 2.5 billion dollar mistake to show a few hundred people floating jellyfish in their living room.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Magic Leap One Creator&apos;s Edition First Look</title><url>https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/08/magic-leap-one-creators-edition-first-look.html</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>raesene9</author><text>Whilst the Hololens is currently more expensive than this version of MagicLeap, I&amp;#x27;ll be interested to see what MS produce next year when the next version is scheduled to come out.&lt;p&gt;One thing that I think MagicLeap have got wrong for a business market is not working over glasses (it seems like you need to fit prescription lenses to the device)&lt;p&gt;That means you can&amp;#x27;t easily share the device with others, which I would think would be a common use case in business (i.e. most places won&amp;#x27;t buy one device per user, but a number of devices for a department)</text><parent_chain><item><author>fsloth</author><text>AR applications already provide concrete added value in construction where you can overlay the digital model with the site for inspections and such.&lt;p&gt;I would see Magic Leap falls to same category as hololens - which is used for real work in the construction industry - but only on a more affordable price point.&lt;p&gt;The key question is how easy it is to develop applications for it. Hololens basically consumes unity apps which makes it a pretty easy for development and deployment.</text></item><item><author>Guest9812398</author><text>As always with Magic Leap, I&amp;#x27;m still not seeing a single compelling use case. Sea turtles swimming around the air, or a T-rex on the desk is fun for a few minutes, but it&amp;#x27;s not worth the price of entry. At this point, I&amp;#x27;ve lost all faith in their vision. After years of following their posts, they haven&amp;#x27;t demonstrated a single thing of value.&lt;p&gt;What are they expecting now? They honestly think developers are going to flock to this device with no audience for $2,250 and produce groundbreaking applications and games that will sell millions of Magic Leaps to consumers to recover their investment?&lt;p&gt;Why don&amp;#x27;t they take that 2.5 billion dollars, and prove a single application or game &lt;i&gt;can&lt;/i&gt; be developed for this product that people will line up to buy? If they can&amp;#x27;t do it with unlimited money, almost a decade of time, and the future of their business depending on it, then why do they expect some random developers are going to pay money to do it for them?&lt;p&gt;I know this post sounds negative, but I&amp;#x27;m 100% convinced this product will be dead on arrival and nothing more than a 2.5 billion dollar mistake to show a few hundred people floating jellyfish in their living room.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Magic Leap One Creator&apos;s Edition First Look</title><url>https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/08/magic-leap-one-creators-edition-first-look.html</url></story>