The stuff Hacker News actually recommends.

VR and AR headsets · Microsoft HoloLens

Microsoft HoloLens 2

11owners with an opinion
33%of verdicts positive
1/2positive/negative since 2024
0happy after 3+ years

Praised for performance and comfort; criticized for display and ease of use.

What people wrote

Doesn’t like it
Hello! I spent a lot of time in graduate school researching AR/VR technology (specifically regarding its utility as an accessibility tool) and learning about barriers to adoption. In my opinion, there are three major hurdles preventing widespread adoption of this modality: 1. *Weight*: To achieve powerful computation like that of the HoloLens, you need powerful processing. The simplest solution to this is to put the processing in the device, which adds weight to it. The HoloLens 2 weighs approximately 566g (or 1.24lb), which is a LOT of weight compared to a pair of traditional glasses, which weigh approximately 20-50g. Speaking as someone who developed with the HL2 for a few years, all-day wear with the device is uncomfortable and untenable. The weight of the device HAS to be comfortable for all-day use, otherwise it hinders adoption. 2. *Battery*: Ironically, making the device smaller to accommodate all-day wear means that you're simultaneously reducing its battery life, which reduces its utility as an all-day wearable: any onboard battery must be smaller, and thus store less energy. This is a problematic trade-off: you don't want the device to weigh too much that people can't wear it, but you also don't want the device to weigh too little that it ceases to have function. 3. *Social Acceptability*: This is where I have some expertise, as it was the subject of my research. Simply put, if a wearer feels as though they stand out by wearing an XR device, they're hesitant to wear…
Neutral
The devices they tried are 1080p and not pushing enough pixels for reading text. Even the Quest 3 with much more per eye is not great if you want to do knowledge work in VR. The main issues is that text is blurry at the edges, so instead of glancing with your eyes, you have to turn your head. You're definitely going to want passthrough. Suggestion, if you have a VR setup already, is to try out Immersed(.com) that can connect any computer to multiple virtual monitors. If you like the idea, you'll want a 4k/eye device, which is still what we are all waiting on. They have their own Vison(.com) in the works, founders edition supposedly shipping later this year. (My understanding is that Immersed cannot unlock AVP enough to operate like all the other headsets, but I'm also not trying to spend that much again on a first edition (bought the HL2, which is the best experience for smart glasses still, FOV sucks tho))
Likes it
Hololens 2 was the best experience of all of them, also shut down The issue is a hardware miniaturization one, I used think whoever creates the first real smart glasses is in an advantageous position, but the likes of Apple and Google can likely roll their own quickly once that time draws near. They already own the software stacks, which is really what you want to own. AR glasses will have dozens of comparable vendors when they break the wall down
Recommends it
Hololens 2 has the best "smart glasses" experience imho, though it's a dead product at this point. Worth it if you can find a used one at a good price. MRTK is an awesome framework and there are some people keeping it alive last I saw Quest 3 is the cheapest and most accessible, but is a passthrough device Apple Vision Pro should probably be on the list, but I have no experience with it personally. Also a passthrough device This site is a good place to stay up to date with the hardware: https://vr-compare.com/ar The biggest holdup is FOV for AR / smart glasses. Passthrough is lame by comparison
Likes it
I think of Rosey from Jetsons and Detroit: Become Human for the dystopian realities that are probably more likely than we'd want Having a Hololens 2, an experience that is worth trying, just waiting for FOV to improve, and to a lesser extent for the form factor to shrink. I would use the HL2 for monitors if the FOV was there, it's really light
Likes it
This. I consider myself a VR/AR enthusiast and I've had many VR headsets since the DK1, included Hololens 2 (and now Vision Pro). The day I started using Hololens 2 I just though "Wow, I could wear this for hours and even do real work on this if the displays and performance were a bit better". The product was simply amazing but it had a few issues (mainly performance) that it limited the device to very specific use cases. Microsoft decided to mostly abandon the project, move/fire most of the team and give up rather than keep spending resources on a product that had an incredible potential... What would happen if Microsoft released a headset like Hololens 2 capable of running Windows apps for consumers at a similar price to AVP? They have Windows Mixed Reality, an almost infinite software catalogue, and the capabilities to do it... buy they simply don't (think about the Surface).
Likes it
I primarily bought my Q3 as a holdover to the Visor. I use the Immersed app and AR definitely is a great feature when using a virtual desktop setup, for drinking coffee and using a real keyboard. I secondarily bought it as a Q1 upgrade for entertainment. That being said, the AR features still don't hold a candle to the Hololens 2 experience. The hand and environment recognition are still behind, even after 3+ years, and passthrough will never compare to real view. There are tons of visual distortions in the Q3 passthrough to make it usable like the early videos people put out, but for desk work it's fine. Then main issue with Q3 for virtual screens is the uneven pixel density. Words are blurry if not at the center, where you would normally use your eyes to look IRL. This is not peripheral distance, but quick eye glance distance. My understanding is Visor is designing their displays and lenses so this is not an issue.
Doesn’t like it
I had an occulus rift back in the day. Collecting dust and obsolete now. I've experimented with HoloLens 2 and found the dev env to be crap. Likely going to grab a quest 3 when it comes out. Anyone hacking software for it give their opinion for how the tooling is? On the rift, it felt the tooling was unity or unreal, which sucked for me. I'd rather write python or c++ code, but something not too low level (OpenGL, Vulkan seem too low level) I don't want to work at shader level but at a level where I can position and compose meshes into objects. Does that exist yet? Or is it fundamentally too hard to be expressed without high level tools like Unity?
Doesn’t like it
So like a HL2. Typing on Hololens sucks using voice or eye tracking. You'll want a Bluetooth keyboard about 5 minutes after you get this thing
Neutral
I disagree, I consider the iPhone to be a gaming device. By many metrics it might even be the most popular gaming device ever. It's not only a gaming device, but it can be more than one thing. That said, I suspect that the price tag on this generation of the Vision is probably gonna shut out most casual users; maybe we will see marquee, platform-selling games on it in later generations but I have a hard time imagining many people buying it for that until they become more affordable. I suspect that this will be a hard sell to the crowd that has $3K to spend on a gaming device (which granted, lots of people who play PC games spend that much), so it may be a chicken-and-egg problem. That said, having used Hololens 2 and Magic Leap I saw the potential for AR to be something really cool. I'm certainly rooting for Apple to finally deliver something polished and compelling, both for professional and consumer users.
Doesn’t like it
Everyone can see the value of a Holodeck, or a magical lightweight high-resolution display that barely weighs on your head, doesn't cause eye-strain and doesn't mess up your hair. But that hasn't yet been technically achieved. What the comments are saying is: "I can't see how current state-of-the-art wearable displays can offer any value, given their current limitations " And I agree. With none of the headsets I've tried (Rift, Rift-S, Valve Index, HoloLens, HoloLens 2), I could imagine working 8 hours per day. They're heavy, scratchy and are annoying to put-on & take off. The Nreal Airs, mentioned by a sibling comment, have a promising form-factor, but only feature a 1080p display. At our current technological advancement, I doubt that Apple will overcome these limitations next week.
Recommends it
Microsoft Hololens 2: I use one for work, and it's absolutely incredible. It's an augmented reality headset with built-in hand tracking, so you interact with the holograms by touching them with your hands. You mentioned "Tony Stark" technology, and it really is like the hologram computer he uses. When you look down at your hands, you see a Windows logo appears on your wrist (it follows your wrist due to the hand tracking). When you tap on the Windows icon on your wrist, a start menu appears in front of you, and you can choose an AR app to launch by tapping it with your finger. These apps can be full 3D experiences (like ones created with Unity) or they can be 2D apps where you can place 2D windows around you (like the built-in Edge browser app). These headsets are over $3K, so they're currently used for high-end niche use cases that justify that investment. For example, some of my customers use them to show 3D instructions to technicians for aerospace manufacturing. However, from using the Hololens 2, it's clear to me that AR will inevitably become a major computing platform once the price is reduced. My guess is that we will start to see that in 6 - 10 years.
Doesn’t like itDoesn’t say they own it
For that to happen we would need a transparent display that can block light. Seeing content on an additive display will always look somewhat transparent, with no hope of displaying blacks. The augmentation on the vision pro look so much better than on a HoloLens2, it's like looking at 3d printed objects.
Likes itDoesn’t say they own it
> I don’t see how a headset with only 4K per eye can possibly simulate a virtual display with the field-of-view size and can’t-perceive-the-individual-pixels “retina” quality of a Studio Display. At your desk, I can’t imagine how wearing a headset would be better than sitting in front of a Studio Display. When travelling — even if your “travel” is no farther than your couch or the local coffee shop — it doesn’t seem worthwhile to wear a headset when your MacBook already has an excellent display, even if only 13 inches. Perhaps I simply lack imagination in this regard, and the experience will be far more compelling than I think it would be. You have to literally "think outside the box" and realize that you won't be looking at extra monitors, but that each application window can be like its on screen of any size, floating wherever you want it. You aren't focusing on every window or screen at once, the detail is there when you look directly at it. From CES 2023: https://www.digilens.com/argo/ I think we will have smart glasses by the end of the decade, considering this and the Hololens 2
Likes itDoesn’t say they own it
AR has some very compelling use cases in medicine and manufacturing. There is also the idea of using AR instead of a physical monitor that may lead to drastic adoption. While the Hololens 2 is expensive, FOV limited, and clunky, the user experience is absolutely incredible. They are the only good smart-glasses like experience I know of right now. They show you what a world is like when the smartphone escapes the little box we carry around. The hard part of AR is the shared experience part. It's close to creating a cross-platform MMO game.