Hacker News Reader

Comment by holoduke | Hacker News Reader

I believe ar becomes a big thing when they have the size of a pair of glasses with 2x 16k screens. Only then it will become mass adopted, replace phones and a life without is nearly impossible. Now its too big.

View on HN

Are we anywhere close to getting that resolution at that density? I think it would require a similar form factor to what you said, but lower resolutions are probably workable. The biggest thing would likely be privacy issues, just like with Glass.

MicroLEDs will fuel the next display revolution and are smaller than some bacteria. They can eventually achieve the perfect pixel density for AR/VR while having better display characteristics than even OLEDs.

Hmm, I was hearing 5k ppi with microLED. 8k displays and cameras for a set of glasses would probably be plenty.

You need 16K per eye to beat human visual density.

But do you actually need to beat human visual density to make a widely adopted product? I'm not convinced that screen resolution is the factor holder back adoption, even at the current densities.

... except when you're working with text ?

Why 16k, given that actual physical displays we use day to day are usually 4k at best, and often less than that?

It seems to me that 8k per eye would be plenty, and even 4k per eye is perfectly adequate for many things.

Those 4k screens are at quite a distance right. 2cm in front you will see pixels. Thats why 16k inside ar/vr glasses.

You see the pixels, yes, but so what? It's still the same pixel density per amount of content you see. I can see pixels on my 4K display, too, because it's placed pretty close to my eyes, but it's still a very useful piece of equipment. Would I like 8K? Sure, and I'll get it when the price is right, but that doesn't make 4K non-viable.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com