From: Mike Bevan <mike@vrnews.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: MISC: VR thoughts
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 19:39:25 +0000


Mark Pflaging writes (referring to an earlier comment by Bob Jacobson):

>Bob is 100% correct about "VR" being known as things other than "VR"
>now

VR in all its technological forms is certainly finding practical
applications nowadays. Five years ago I struggled to find good
applications stories for each issue of VR NEWS. In the past year or so
the position has improved quite dramatically, across a wide range of
industries and markets, notably manufacturing (conceptualisation,
design and prototyping, production planning, marketing, training,
installation and maintenance planning, all based around 'virtual
products'), medical, construction, heritage, and many others.

In discussing their applications with end users in the USA and Europe
I find in general that they have no difficulty whatsoever with using
the term "Virtual Reality" as identifying the new generation of MMI
and its associated technologies and procedures they are now working
with. Of course they continue to use familiar terms such as CAD,
simulation, modelling, 3D graphics, also.

The global popularity of the generic terms "VR" and "Virtual Reality"
against all other contenders has never been higher. This can be tested
quite easily - for example by using a web search engine to rate the
various terms.

The following table shows the comparative number of hits registered by Alta
Vista today - the first column results from setting the search period as
the last ten years, and the second column is for the past year:

VR/Virtual Reality        351929 (82%)    211351 (86%)
Virtual World/s            48099 (11%)     22317 ( 9%)
Virtual Environment/s      23076 ( 5%)      8956 ( 4%)
Synthetic Environment/s     1783            1119
Artificial Reality          1651             840
Total                     426538          244583

We regularly perform comparisons such as these across a wide range of
scientific, technical, trade magazine and news databases, and the
picture presented by this table is what we find pretty much
everywhere.

Another test is to search the world's patents databases on these
various terms. Try http://patents.uspto.gov/patbib_index.html for US
patents, which today produced the following:

VR/Virtual Reality        756 (87%)
Virtual World/s            30
Virtual Environment/s      58
Synthetic Environment/s     2
Artificial Reality         27
Total                     873

In searching the Japanese and European patents databases (which are
not freely accessible via the web) periodically, we no longer bother
with terms other than VR/Virtual Reality, because the hit rate is
negligible, and any hits are also invariably caught by VR/Virtual
Reality.

We also perform these searches on many of the new terms which are
emerging as labels for VR-enabled applications - virtual prototyping,
virtual manufacturing, etc. We do this in the normal course of our
news and features research, and to ensure that the various events we
organise are given names and content themes which are in sympathy with
general market usage. There is absolutely no quantitative evidence in
the literature and databases of general antipathy to the use of the
word 'virtual' in such constructions.

It strikes me from this correspondence that some members of the
worldwide VR community who do not yet subscribe to VR NEWS might
perhaps benefit from doing so, at least for a while. A visit to our
soon-to-be-upgraded website (www.vrnews.com) will reveal that a
3-month free trial is currently on offer for anyone unfamiliar with
our publication.

Regards

Mike Bevan
Editor - VR NEWS
<mike@vrnews.demon.co.uk>

[MODERATOR'S NOTE: Commercial postings are offered on this newsgroup
as a public service.  Their appearance here does not indicate
endorsement by the moderators or by the USENET or its administrators.]
