Magic Leap’s allegedly revolutionary augmented reality technology may in fact be years away from completion and, as it stands now, is noticeably inferior to Microsoft’s HoloLens headset, according to a report from The Information. The report, which incorporates an interview with Magic Leap CEO Rony Abovitz, reveals that the company posted a misleading product demo last year showcasing its technology. The company has also had trouble miniaturizing its AR tech from a bulky helmet-sized device into a pair of everyday glasses, as Abovitz has repeatedly claimed the finished product will accomplish.
The revelations undermine one of the most secretive firms in the technology industry, casting Magic Leap as a fast-growing startup that has overhyped its product with wild marketing stunts and unrealized ambition. The company has raked in $1.4 billion in funding at a valuation of $4.5 billion. Investors include Google, Chinese e-commerce giant Alibaba, and Silicon Valley juggernaut Andreessen Horowitz. It has done so by convincing prominent tech and entertainment figures that it has a cutting-edge, never-before-seen technology that can realistically create virtual objects and blend them with the real world. Magic Leap did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The company has repeatedly used YouTube videos to demonstrate its version of AR, showing tiny elephants in the palms of people’s hands and a life-sized whale jumping out of a virtual ocean on a gymnasium floor. But at least one of these videos — showing an alien invader video game that let the wearer of the supposed headset or glasses make use of real-world objects — was created by visual effects studio Weta Workshop. Prior to today, it was believed Weta had simply created the visual assets for the game. However, The Information reveals the entire video was created by the studio. Magic Leap nonetheless used it to recruit employees to work at its South Florida headquarters. “This is a game we’re playing around the office right now,” reads the video’s description — an assertion that could not have been true.
The Information received a rare product demonstration at Magic Leap, describing the device as a large helmet that connects to a desktop computer using multiple cables. The demo is described as having elements similar to the HoloLens, but with images that are in some cases blurrier and more jittery than Microsoft’s prototype. The HoloLens is now available in a developer kit form for $3,000, and it can be worn completely untethered from a computer.
The crux of the problem appears to be Magic Leap’s gamble on a so-called fiber scanning display, which shines a laser through a fiber optic cable that moves rapidly back and forth to draw images out of light. The company thought the fiber scanning display could be Magic Leap’s breakthrough tech, allowing it to shrink down the extremely expensive hardware used on a previous prototype — a refrigerator-sized device known internally as the “Beast.”
According to The Information, Magic Leap still has not been able to get the fiber scanning display to work. It has since demoted it to a long-term research project. “You ultimately in engineering have to make tradeoffs,” Abovitz said in the interview. Still, the company’s latest prototype appears to be the size of a standard pair of glasses. It’s known internally as the PEQ, for product equivalent, and yet Magic Leap declined to demonstrate it for The Information. Abovitz claims it is only slightly less capable than the earlier, tethered prototypes, but denied that it now uses technology similar to the HoloLens.
Comments
If anyone even remotely interested in VR/AR and who knows how difficult this field is is surprised at this news, that would shock me.
Magic leap has felt like snake oil since day 1
By Mobile-Dom on 12.08.16 7:26pm
Combine that with a distinct lack of any demos despite other AR/VR solutions coming out – their silence is deafening, really.
By Vasp on 12.08.16 10:09pm
I have a feeling that if an AR revolution happens then it most definitely won’t be from this company. I’m not sure if the best engineers in the world would want to go to florida to work on a company they know little to nothing about and I would imagine they would have the best companies competing to hire them in silicone valley.
By Syntaxkita on 12.08.16 10:23pm
A year ago I asked Quora if Magic Leap was a fraud:
https://www.quora.com/Is-Magic-Leap-a-fraud
By neuemoney on 12.08.16 7:35pm
People get blinded by $$$. As an empath / interpersonal communications talent, it is my opinion that a bit of watching this owner talk should be enough to tell you this whole thing is and has always been more dream than potential reality. I won’t venture to guess whether he is intentionally scamming people or if he’s just in way over his head and doesn’t know how to back out, but he knows there’s something huge he’s not letting on, and he always has. It’s in his face and mannerisms.
By Scribe_Of_The_Mist on 12.08.16 8:28pm
I’ve been questioning it just as long. I’ve commented on previous Verge articles about it asking why people believe their wild claims despite no evidence, but some just buy in because they want to.
By Ayepecks on 12.08.16 10:05pm
The issue comes in the phrasing.
The top replier uses "scam." No, I don’t think they’re trying to scam people. And I don’t think they’re trying to commit fraud. I know a guy working there, and he’s one of the most honest people I know. I actually haven’t spoken to him since he started working there, but he wouldn’t take a job that was fraudulent. The company genuinely believes that what it’s doing is possible and that they’ll do it.
A better question is "are they unrealistic dreamers doomed to fail?" Yes. Yes they are.
By MosquitoControl on 12.09.16 9:24am
I’m in the same boat. I have a friend who got a job there and I haven’t talked to her since she got it (not that the NDA would let her talk about work). She wouldn’t stay at a place she had no faith in.
By iAmDeathTheKid on 12.09.16 9:40am
Well……….I’m not surprised, it’s hard to compete against a tech titan like Microsoft, that has the best engineers in the world, Win32 on ARM, Xbox 360 backwards compatibility, and their hardware projects show this.
By Daniel Su on 12.08.16 7:36pm
Actually, I have it on the authority of informed Verge commenters that Nilay was just being salty and this is way better than Hololens. So, there’s that.
By onwu on 12.08.16 7:39pm
You are far too easily impressed. Great feats would be making a Kinect that is responsive, could recognise slightest gestures and with good voice recognition. I don’t think they bought a single hardware product of theirs to a refined and highly functional state.
There is no iPhone, iPad or MacBook level refined hardware in Microsoft’s stable.
By MindYourMind on 12.08.16 8:20pm
Yet Apple sucks and is slow at innovation? so what?
By Daniel Su on 12.08.16 8:37pm
lol, they still make easily the best products in their respective categories.
By chadsmo on 12.08.16 8:54pm
You mean the faltering iPad sales, the overpriced and underpowered laptops they ‘sell’, the watch flop with a 71% collapse in sales? LOL! There’s only one category in which they lead and that’s the iPhone… In which their sales have dropped massively in the last 3 quarters… So please backup your claim with data, cause without it you’re just another fanboy with a (wrong) opinion.. LOL
By simonjs on 12.08.16 9:22pm
you are the one with the wrong opinion. If you want to you sales data (you brought it up) Apple leads in smartphones, tablets and smart watches. Comparing the #1 selling thing to the same thing, still number one, with a decline YoY still means it’s leading.
By trewtrew on 12.08.16 9:37pm
Apple is the market leader in two of the three product categories you claim they’re faltering in. The Apple Watch outsold its next closest competitor by nearly 100% in its worst quarter, which happens to the quarter leading up to a new release. Other companies would kill to have a "flop" like that. That’s the kind of pattern one would expect to see when a product is situated at the top of the market – successful right out the gate, with appeal waning in anticipation of a refresh. It’s the same with the iPhone. Sales have consistently fallen in Q1-Q3 every year since the iPhone 4s, and see a huge spike in Q4. But I guess that doesn’t fit your narrative that Apple is losing appeal.
And Apple is still the market leader in tablet sales by a long shot. They don’t lead in laptop sales, but they still manage 10% market share, despite only offering 3 models.
It’s a bit odd that you are demanding data from others and accusing people of having "wrong opinions" when anyone who has actually looked at the data can see that you are misrepresenting it.
By Giblets on 12.09.16 10:29am
I’d say Surface and Xbox are on par with what Apple does. The Surface Studio and Book are more impressive than anything Apple has made in years. Maybe MS doesn’t provide an experience quite as polished as what Apple does, but that’s the inherent nature of the more open MS ecosystem. It’s funny you mention Kinect because HoloLens is actually said to have fantastic gesture control that is basically a mobile version of Kinect. If you watch youtube videos of people using it does seem to work and "recognize the slightest gestures and with good voice recognition".
By SubstanceD91 on 12.08.16 11:34pm
I love my Xbox. But apple would never release anything like it. They launched it with more capability in the Kinect than it currently has. You can’t even navigate with it anymore, and it’s straight up embarrassing how long it takes to get to the home screen or just do simple tasks like double tap home and press X to record. Not to mention the thing is gigantic and inelegant. It’s very much a Microsoft product. The PS4 is much closer to Apple’s design philosophy. It does less but it does those things well.
By bolawastaken on 12.09.16 9:25am
I don’t really get this. I’m sure serious companies like Google would never invest hundreds of millions into something without actually seeing it’s state at the current moment, and thinking it has a chance of succeeding – so Google had to have seen their tech first-hand, and decided that it was worth it?
By BigDaddy0790 on 12.08.16 8:17pm
Well, it doesn’t say how much of the 1.4 billion Google chipped in. They might have rationalized a small stake just so that they’d be kept updated of any progress.
Much like the Phantom console, without hindsight there was always a possibility that it was not vapor.
By Captain Megaton on 12.08.16 8:47pm
the phantom lapboard did eventually make it to market if I remember correctly
By SubstanceD91 on 12.08.16 11:37pm
Sure, but then again, it’s a successfull company that operates for profit. Investing even 10 000 would surely only be done under close supervision.
By BigDaddy0790 on 12.11.16 1:36pm
Google chipped in about 0.5 Billion. I wouldn’t call that a ‘small stake’.
By TheScientists on 02.09.17 3:26pm
I’m not sure they wouldn’t. Y’know just incase.
By hyperionic on 12.08.16 8:49pm
Google Ventures is run fairly loosely. They’ve historically had a high turnover, and operate somewhat differently that traditional Venture funds. They emphasize data-analysis over instinct/art, so the Founders background as co-founder of MAKO Surgical Corp would have weighted them towards investing.
By ench on 12.09.16 11:14am