Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2017/08/21/ar.html
…
What’s VT?
Where do “IT research firms” land on the “Gartner Hype Cycle”?
.
.
.
Oh. Here apparently:
4 Likes
If you were cool, you wouldn’t have to ask.
Yeah, AR seems a lot more lively than VR at this point. My personal feeling is that VR got released, yet again, half-baked, just like in the '90s. I feel like it’s not until it includes, as a standard part of it, some functional vestibular stimulation systems that it’ll be ready. But since they kind of already blew it, even with immediate adoption of the technology it might take another decade for VR to re-emerge.
1 Like
Not related to AR/VR per se … I was wondering where CRISPR/Cas9 is (unless it’s lumped under ‘human augmentation’) and biomedical things like alternative DNA sequencing technology etc are on Gartner’s curve. It seems somewhat biased towards software/hardware (but then, I guess they are an IT consultancy).
1 Like
Good question. I have been surprised how little crispr hype there has been given how much people are already doing with it. Within the industry, I’d guess crispr is riding high right now. Outside it, not so much yet. But it’s not really a public facing technology the way VR (or crispr’s applications) are, so public hupe may be the wrong metric.
Has anyone tracked Gartner’s predictions over the last ten years or so?
Any fool can make a graph, but it would be very impressive if the technologies actually move along the graph as they say they will.
1 Like
Wonder if anyone at Gartner has read Lanier on VR or was around for the first hype cycle in the 90s?
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
