From: mueller@cs.unc.edu (Carl Mueller) Subject: Re: INDUSTRY: Successful VR Apps Date: 7 Dec 1996 15:53:53 -0500 Message-ID: <58clh1$79t@whitney.cs.unc.edu> Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill John Alway writes: > I must respectfully disagree. VR technology has wider > and deeper application possibilities than does the venerable > helicopter and for much lower cost. VR technology will help > engineers immensely. It will become an indespensible aid to > model visualization so much so that no successful company will be > able to do without it. It will aid in science, and complicated > procedures, such as surgeries. Um, you appear to be mixing up the analogy presented: VR is to plain desktop computer interface as helicopter is to airplane. The things you mentioned can also be done without VR. I'm making a distinction here in the definition of VR: to be VR (by this definition), it requires a user-interface that directly tracks the user and responds with real-time visual (and other) feedback. Thus programs such as "Virtus VR" (with a CRT/keyboard/mouse interface) don't count. Thus the original question appears to be: What successfull applications are there where VR (by the above definition) is a _necessary_ component? > As I think about your helicopter analogy another thing > stikes me. I couldn't buy a helicopter today because of > sheer cost, and then most people couldn't place one in their > back yard, so I'd imagine they'd have to rent a space at > an airport. However, low cost VR is easy to come by, in > fact, many kids own and fiddle with VR for fun and tech- > nical interest. For a few hundred I can own a decent little > VR kit: in fact, I do own one. Again, the analogy is mixed up. As far VR apps go, I'm looking forward to Virtus VR-type apps (and the necessary hardware) to go mainstream and become as intuitive and easy to use (or more so) than lego blocks. -Carl (mueller@cs.unc.edu)