Author: H

State of XR 2020 – My Conclusions
After my participation of the State of XR 2019 2020 project, I
have come to the following three conclusions. The overall results
edited by iLRN will replace what was known as the New Media Consortium
(NMC) Report for 2020, albeit for XR topics (Virtual Reality, Augmented
Reality, Mixed Reality, Virtual Worlds) only. The following are the
schisms present within XR that most fascinate me.

Accessibility versus Immersion

Again
and again, when my fellow researchers and I examined sources, papers,
and examples of XR being used in research and education, we found gaps
in either of these concepts. It is as if you can have one but not the
other.

If a technology is accessible, it is not fully immersive.

If a technology is amazingly immersive, it is not accessible to some population.

This
tension spreads far beyond a physical campus or location as well. If a
university is investing in maker spaces, 3D printing, or immersive
headsets (all items that are by definition limited to a certain space
and time), the tradeoff is that only a few users can partake of an
experience at any given time. This opens up the conundrum of do you
invest heavily in spaces where only a few students benefit? To increase
accessibility, do you design immersive rooms instead of VR headsets?
Then, if you have a room, do you put more than one person in it?

To be clear, I feel that this conundrum can be overcome. We’re just not there yet. I feel that the solution lies in the fact that we (as in humanity) will be able to adapt to not fully immersive experiences and we’ll call that good enough.

The Most Effective XR has the Highest Stakes

Over
and over, as I stack up the pile of research studies that show that XR
is an effective conduit of education, the majority of studies right now
are from the emergency services: medical, military, police, and fire.

Why is that?

Putting this conundrum in another light, we know that immersive experiences heretofore have used fear as their greatest emotional coinage
(2018, Bailenson). For example, put a learner into a training situation
where they have to find and rescue a person from a burning building and
then begin CPR, you will find that XR gives very impressive learning outcomes.

So
why was the high stakes emotion of fear the same effective coinage in
both situations? Was that destined to be XR’s first proven success?

I don’t have a problem with this. Don’t misinterpret me.

But
I wonder what it is about ‘high stakes’ and fear that made this emotion
the first to show it works via the research in XR? Bring humans into an
experience where it feels scary, but make sure they remember that the
situation isn’t real. The result becomes high entertainment value (i.e.
Grand Theft Auto). My point is that there are many other emotions that
we could pick for XR to ellicit/play on.

We could have selected love as our emotion. What about wonder? Awe? Compassion?

I’m not saying that there are not XR applications out there that don’t pull upon the non-fear emotions; there are. But why did fear get to the front of the “effective” line?

The Role of Justice is Coming to XR

If you followed my exploration of the History of XR series, you know that I was engaging in an exercise of future prediction. As such, I sensed two choices:
1. All possibilities are possible.
2. Patterns predict what will happen.
After
my study, I decided, as a designer, that choice #2 is the better bet.
That is, if I could find a foundation upon which a feature, design, or
product was built and *that* foundation was successful, then I would bet
that the future feature would be successful.

Here is a simple example:

At this point, books
are one of humanity’s greatest design successes. Many users want to
read (there is market desire) and are more successful after reading
(effectiveness is high). Books are predictable; they contain many
patterns that are widely understood: title, table of contents, letters
form words, words form sentences, sentences form paragraphs, paragraphs
are contained arguments, books proceed through an argument from
beginning to an end (in different directions depending on language).

An
example conclusion, therefore, is that future XR technologies *must*
contain some element of text to be successful. Purely icon-based
communication does not feel successful.

But back to XR as an entire picture. Justice was built into the very first concepts of human’s imaginings of alternate realities.
(Hello Plato!) I believe justice is still there, but it is very buried.
I look for justice to show up more prominently in the future. There are
already calls for XR to be a harassment-free or a prejudice free zone.

I’ll be spending 2020 contemplating this and looking for examples of justice in XR applications.

I seek to find justice in:

AR
– I look forward to the day when disciplines described today as ‘for
those who have vision’ to be opened to all. For example, in science we
know it is very hard to envision electron orbitals as
‘statistically-likely places to find electrons.’ AR will be able to add
that sight to anyone studying the Periodic Table. Just the same for
envisioning the flow of electrons in electricity.

VR
– Lucas Rizotto’s recently released Oculus game “Where Thoughts Go”
introduces a much more subtle version of empathy, not a bang you over
the head version.

VW – Some quiet and yet profound results are coming from the social application of virtual platforms. Virtual Ability
has been doing spectacular work for years on all kinds of physical and
mental ability fronts. I look for this to open up as an increasingly
socially acceptable form of support and thus, justice.

It’s almost a new decade! I can’t wait to see what the future does hold. See you there.

#StateOfXR
#Research #Conclusions #AccessibilityInXR #ImmersionInXR #XR #AR #VR
#VW #Fear #HighStakes #Effective #Compassion #Awe #SocialSupport
#Justice #EmergencyServices

This article originally appeared on LinkedIn on December 23, 2019. Updated font and images on February 23, 2026.
November 10, 2021
A History of XR Cross Reality Part 6 of 6
Almost there! Only five years to go and then into the future, she writes and points like Doc Brown.

2014 – Future

2015 Google Cardboard

Source: Wikicommons

Google (again? They were just in Part 5) sends out Google cardboard in the New York Times (and other media),
expanding the new idea– a cheap VR viewer where you use your
smartphone and some special apps. Pluses: mass market availability,
cheap, created buzz. Negatives: absolutely no hands. People want to do
more than look, they want to touch.

2016 Emotiv

Source: Wikicommons

OK
– I will go on record and say I do not like this product. It records
the user’s brain waves when a certain action is requested (like open
email) and then translates future instances of those brain waves as
commands to repeat the learned action. Why don’t I like this? I cannot
find many instances of telekinesis that have worked so far for humanity.
Maybe in a future I can’t see, but for now, nope. Just remember, there
is no spoon.

2016 Mobile World Congress – Facebook gets into the VR action.

It is interesting to note that when very large corporations make steps into a certain technology, all of our heads should be turning.

Facebook’s
virtual world Horizon (once called Spaces) just opened in October 2019.
Horizon so far doesn’t seem to be getting a warm reception. [Update: Horizons was set to shutdown and then quickly backtracked this decision in 2026.]

This
invention represents an inflection point in technology where
we double back on ourselves and create a conundrum. When asked if they
would utilize a virtual world to ‘be’ (embodiment) with their friends, I
see most regular users of Facebook shying away from the concept. These
are the same users that lived totally without Facebook…uh…before
Facebook. As such, they were synchronously and physically with
people before. Being with people should not, by itself, weird out this
population. So why the hesitation near this concept now? Are we
‘friends’ with people and do things within Facebook that we would not do
when in-person with them? #Research needed here.

2019 January – Apple patenting new gesture capture devices?

Maybe?
As I’ve said though, no need for gloves or devices attached to people.
Ditch that idea. New gestures to mean new things though?? [Edit: I’ve deleted and now downplayed Apple here, they did got for a high end “Pro” headset…that didn’t do so well.]

2019 October – AWE conference in Munich #AWE2019

The headset detects hands. At the time, cool.

2019 – Magic Leap

I don’t love this product. Why? See my Future of XR Headsets article. Magic Leap can be redeemed in my opinion though. I will wait this out. [Update: Magic Leap died in 2024 and been resuscitated in 2025.]

2019 – Microsoft Hololens 2

Excellent
product. Why? Because the person looking at the user can see their
eyes. Besides what I wrote about in my Future of XR Headsets article,
Microsoft has taken a page from their own (MS Office) playbook for this
launch. They are going directly to the business market. As such, there
will be back-pressure into education to prepare learners for the
workplace. This product has many of the characteristics of future
success.

2019 – example of room-based VR

The plus here? Accessibility. Also, you could get more people into
the same experience. So this is VR for more than one person.

2019 – Microsoft demo of a hologram gives a partial keynote speech in Japanese, when the speaker does not speak Japanese at all.

Very much #thefutureistoday.

2019 – Disney’s The Void – example of location-based VR.

Negatives:
Must go to a location to experience this. Experience is not cheap.
Positives: Increase in quality content (Star Wars!) and you can
experience this in group (more than one at a time).
[Update: The Void died in the pandemic due to financial problems.]

So my predictions for the future of XR *based* on studying the past:
- Text will be a continuing necessity. Put it everywhere and in everything you can. Text has over a 2000 year history
  in human interfaces; it is a winner. We need 3D fonts that can work
  “floating” and over the top of a variety of light and dark backgrounds
  and we need them yesterday. #3DFonts
- User-customized ways of interacting with large amounts of information.
- Tech not touching you that still works.
- No need for gloves.
- First forms of what works will likely be two technologies squished together.
- Seeing your user as a human will be more important than the tech itself.
Interesting
that phone and sound are almost non-existent in my XR research. I
didn’t avoid it, but it also didn’t really show up as a necessary future
player. I’ll keep cogitating on that.

Keep an eye on science fiction. If you noticed, my sci fi sources dried up about 5 years ago and everything I shared was
a technological innovation. What Sci Fi sources are predicting the near
and far future? Battlestar Galactica? Handmaid’s Tale? The Marvel
Universe? [Update: it was much more Handmaid’s Tale that I care to think about.]

Amara’s Law: We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run.

Going
forward, I am very interested to trace the justice concept (remember
Plato?) through this technology. It is significant that we can
criticize much of the current XR environment as being made by young,
white males in silicon valley. We need diversity and inclusion inside
the workforce making XR.

What comes next? I can’t wait to find out.

Miss any of the prior history of XR and you are curious? Have at it!

Part 1 380 B.C. to 1880

Part 2 1881 to 1909

Part 3 1910 to 1965

Part 4 1966 – 1998

Part 5 1999 – 2013

Part 6 2014 – Future

Have any time points that you think I should include? Tell us as a comment!

#Reality
#CrossReality #MixedReality #VirtualReality #AugmentedReality
#VirtualWorlds #Design #Transmedia #XR #VR #AR #ARVRinEdu #EdTech
#Innovation #GoogleCardboard #Emotiv #FacebookVR #FacebookVW
#FacebookHorizon #AppleGestures #iLRN #AWE #MagicLeap #MicrosoftHolens2
#MicrosoftHologram #OmegaOphthalmics #DisneyTheVoid #Samsung2020
#GooglePixel4 #AppleAR #Spectacles #SmellOVision #FutureTrends #3DText
#YourUserIsHuman

This article originally appeared on LinkedIn on December 2, 2019. Updated on March 31, 2026 with replaced images and I deleted some (now embarrassing) future predictions.
November 10, 2021
A History of XR Cross Reality Part 5 of 6

As a reminder, we are using science fiction as our time
machine vehicle to examine how good we are at predicting the future and
our intention is to predict the future of cross realities (XR).

1999 – 2013

1999 Tom Clancy’s Net Force

I
think I am probably one of the only writers that would put this in an
XR history timeline. The namesake is a police force of a future internet
where world citizens can relinquish country-based citizenship and
become a citizen of the internet. But the prediction I liked was the
description of how the internet could become an interface where the user
could customize their interaction with it. It is hard to describe (read
the book!). I find that prediction really tantalizing. The
closest reality we have right now is the fact that everyone’s home
screen on their smart phones is different, but this interaction with
large data sets is still in front of us. More on this topic in 2007.

1999 The Matrix – considered the first truly dark interpretation of the power of the internet.

Source: IMDB

In this story, the internet is a place to escape from. Take
one more look at that date: 1999. We’re really only about four years
after the big 1995 America Online expansion of subscribers. Only four
years and we’re already starting to suspect that this internet thing is
something to be wary of.

2002 Minority Report – Gloves used to manipulate screens and displays.

Source: IMDB

I
agree with the futurists that say that this vision of screens and
displays will be accurate (floating in the air, perhaps only visible to
the direct user). However, I predict: ditch the gloves.
You won’t need them in the future. Radar will be able to detect your
finger location in real time, so you don’t have to wear a device on or
in your body for this functionality.

2003 – Birth of Second Life – an immersive persistent world.

It’s still around. But multiple iterations of virtual worlds now exist.

2007 – The Croquet Project.
This is a now defunct project that basically embodied Tom Clancy’s
customizable browser. I love the idea. I still think that versions of
this idea will arrive in the future. (Sorry the picture below does not
come close to showing what it was. It’s hard to use images to describe
this.)

Source: Wikicommons

2007
– The first iPhone. Hard to believe we’ve been through all this history
and only just now did we arrive at the first smartphone.

Source: Wikicommons

2010 – The first tablet, the iPad.

Source: Wikicommons

I
didn’t originally plan to take us directly from Apple launch of iPhone
to launch of iPad, but I would like to show the likely user experience
pathway between these two items. Let’s pretend we are in an Apple
meeting room in 2008. We’re asked “What are our users experiencing?” The
report is “Well, they like pulling up the internet and messaging from
wherever, but still when they get on a (frequent) business flight, they
lug along their full laptop (for work files), a book (for reading when
they have a few hours ahead), some magazines (for light reading during
short delays) and something that might play a few very small videos.” So
Apple sees 3 different devices:

A phone – that does what phones do, and a little more

A laptop – that carries huge files and has a keyboard, but is otherwise clunky to carry

Print media & some stored music – stored on a device that does ONLY that function

So the iPad is the combination of those three needs. You might remember that the iPad was not launched as a phone replacement though.
Need a phone for communication? Actually, not so much. We now know that
smartphones are used for phone communication 5% of the time. That’s 95%
of the time they are not used as phones. The iPad allowed all of those
other needs to be met. Remember that Disney robot vacuuming, but the
true future was the combination robot vacuum. The combination – put
technologies together- wins again!

2013 Microsoft Kinect – Defunct but considered a commercial success at 35 million units sold.

Source: Wikicommons

Personally,
I love this device for the accessibility. Nothing touches the body! You
could be in a wheelchair and use this. You could not have hands and use
this. Love this idea! I pin this as a VERY future workable idea: devices that do not need to touch you.

2013 “Modern” smartwatches born.

2013 Google Glass – another defunct innovation

Source: Wikicommons

Interesting
to note the privacy backlash that happened in 2013. Everyone was
concerned that the camera on the Glass (wore by the user) would be
watching & recording them (not the user). Fast forward to
2019 and people whip out their phone, camera, & filter in a second!
My, how times change!

[Update from 2026: The backlash against Meta’s AR glasses grows.]

In case you missed the other articles in this timeline, here they are:

Part 1 380 B.C. to 1880

Part 2 1881 to 1909

Part 3 1910 to 1965

Part 4 1966 – 1998

Part 5 1999 – 2013

Part 6 2014 – Future

#Reality
#CrossReality #MixedReality #VirtualReality #AugmentedReality
#VirtualWorlds #Design #Transmedia #XR #VR #AR #ARVRinEdu #EdTech
#Innovation #TomClancy #NetForce #Matrix #MinorityReport #ARGloves
#SecondLife #CroquetProject #iPhone #iPad #MicrosoftKinect #GoogleGlass

This article originally posted to LinkedIn on December 1, 2019. Updated font on March 31, 2026 with replaced images.

November 10, 2021
A History of XR Cross Reality Part 4 of 6

If you persevered through Parts 1, 2, and 3,
well done! For me, the fun starts now as the timeline now includes my
lifetime which means I can remember and attest to the impact that
science fiction has had on our cross reality creations. We have color TV
so let’s almost finish up the 20th century!

1966 – 1998

1966
Star Trek and the communicator – a hand held device that could do
several functions, all without cords, wires, or being at a
panel/payphone.

1968 Heads-Up Display suggested for civilian, private use.

1969
Another paleo futuristic image, this one from Japan. This shows
adaptive technology used for learning, no teacher in the room, and robot
that doles out punishment.

Source: Shōnen Sunday, a Japanese Manga magazine, 1969.

1972
The first smartwatch, the Pulsar. I tried to find what definition
‘first smartwatch’ meant and I learned that it meant ‘you have to press a
button in order for it to display the time’.

The Pulsar, the first smart watch. Source: watchdepot.com.au

1974 This
video, One day, a computer will fit on a desk (1974) is excellent to watch. The world is predicted for
2001.

That’s
Arthur C. Clarke. What is it about science fiction writers that have
the ability to accurately predict the future? I think it’s first the
broad spectrum of options that science fiction provides. Second, I think
that they can also pick out design patterns that are viable.

1979 Star Wars – communication via recorded hologram.

Star Wars, A New Hope, Leia as hologram scene.

1982
EPCOT opens. This is the now-closed Horizons pavilion which focused
entirely on the future. I wanted to show this image because of the
robots in the home. One robot in the kitchen is cooking and
simultaneously cleaning.

Let’s zoom in on the “Butler” robot who is vacuuming.

The butler from the now-gone Horizons Epcot pavilion

Notice
how Disney has the Butler robot — who is capable of other
duties–literally using a vacuum cleaner that would have been present in
1960 or even 1982. So futurists often start by putting objects together to increase the functions. Need your floor vacuumed? No problem. Your robot will grab the vacuum and do it for you. One device will use another device.

But
today, we have Roomba vacuums. Disney was wrong. What happened? In the
future that came to pass, the robot and the vacuum cleaner were put
together into one device (and the butler’s duties are done by other
robots in our homes, I’m looking at you Alexa). Take note of that
pattern; what started as two devices actually became one.

This is a fun image from 1982.

Credit: Alan Kay

This
was drawn by Alan Kay who was drafted to draw a vision of how Atari
could be incorporated into the classroom. Bold moves for a game
company– then.

Note: “Here we see some of the earliest visions
from Silicon Valley of the personal computer in the classroom. The
future of education here is technological. It is branded. It is
game-based. There are still desks in rows and clusters. And students
still rebel.” (Watters, 2015)

1992 Snow Crash novel by Neal Stephenson.

Cover art for the Snow Crash novel by Neal Stephenson

Stephenson
writes of a virtual world, the impact of headsets, and a basic Sumerian
language programming plot. Philip Rosedale credits his wife as handing
him this novel to read that became the starting point for Linden Lab’s
Second Life virtual world.

1995’s The Net with Sandra Bullock is a techno thriller of an isolated remote worker.

Source: imdb.com

Problems
ensue when she discovers a tech problem and a large corporation goes
after her via the only conduit in her life: everything digital. Without
giving away the plot because I’ve heard some have never seen this movie (what?), there is a very interesting intersection with privacy, security, and medical records. Let’s just say that I’m very glad that this prediction of the future has not come true…yet.

Part 1 380 B.C. to 1880

Part 2 1881 to 1909

Part 3 1910 to 1965

Part 4 1966 – 1998

Part 5 1999 – 2013

Part 6 2014 – Future

#Reality
#CrossReality #MixedReality #VirtualReality #AugmentedReality
#VirtualWorlds #Design #Transmedia #XR #VR #AR #ARVRinEdu #EdTech
#Innovation #StarTrek #Communicator #PaleoFuture #Pulsar #StarWars
#Hologram #EPCOT #Horizons #Disney #Roomba #Atari #SnowCrash
#NealStephenson #SecondLife #PhilipRosedale #LindenLab #TheNet
#SandraBullock

This article originally posted to LinkedIn on November 30, 2019. Updated on February 24, 2026 with better font and re-added images.

November 10, 2021
A History of XR Cross Reality Part 3 of 6

France_in_XXI_Century._School.jpg: Jean Marc Cote (if 1901) or Villemard (if 1910)derivative work: TVJunkie, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

1910 – 1965

In 1910, the artist Jean
Marc Cote, is commissioned to create artwork for cigar boxes showing
humanity in the year 2000. Some of these predictions hit remarkably
close the mark.

Flying firefighters. No? You do know that departments are incorporating drones, right?

Villemard, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Schools transformed by just listening-learning (blog banner image).

Now educators and I can have a field day with just this image. I
would ask a group of teachers-to-be to analyze what was correct in this
prediction and what was incorrect. We could go on and on. The main idea
here to get is that learning was going to transformed to occur only by listening. How ridiculous, right? And yet, three years later in real life…

Thomas Edison examining some film. NPGallery, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

“Thomas
Edison famously predicted in 1913 that “Books will soon be obsolete in
schools” – but not because books were to be ground up by a knowledge
mill. Rather, Edison believed that one of the technological inventions
he was involved with and invested in – the motion picture – would
displace both textbooks and teachers alike.

“I believe that the
motion picture is destined to revolutionize our educational system and
that in a few years it will supplant largely, if not entirely, the use
of textbooks,” Edison asserted in 1922. “I should say that on the
average we get about two percent efficiency out of schoolbooks as they
are written today. The education of the future, as I see it, will be
conducted through the medium of the motion picture… where it should be
possible to obtain one hundred percent efficiency.” (Watters, 2015)

From
1913 to 1931, we have the age of radio. By 1931, television was
demonstrated at the Iowa State Fair. Just two years after (so quick if
you think about it) that the University of Iowa started to experiment
with this medium. The first broadcasts were only video, no audio.
Because televisions were scarcely available commercially and the signal
was weak, users who could receive the signal tended to be with five
miles of the campus and had built their own TVs from parts. If you
wanted to hear sound along with the video, you had to tune in your radio
at the same time. Descriptions of the image produced in these
rudimentary TVs are actually scary (colors, shapes, very fuzzy). But it
is a start!

General Electric early television set. DogsRNice, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons

Professors
quickly figured out that they could broadcast radio from home and then
did so. Students still had to travel to campus and sit in seats to
listen. The next innovation was two way radio so students could ask
questions of the professor.

Haaren High School, New York, accounting class, by radio. Source: https://onetuberadio.com/2023/07/10/1923-distance-learning/

1957
The Sensorama by Morton Heilig is considered the first cross reality
machine. It provided visuals, sounds, vibrations, and smells.

Sensorama patent filing diagram, side view.

1958
I cannot resist including this image of an electric typewriter because
use of text is a common theme that carries through our history of XR and
I do believe it will continue into the future. What is interesting is
the boast that her grades will improve by 38% if you buy her an electric
typewriter. Her grades will improve in what…typing class?

1960 No history mentioning futurism would be complete without mentioning Walt Disney.

Source: expolounge.blogspot.com

In
addition to his many other achievements, Walt Disney was a visionary
futurist and he did not stop with just dreaming; he set in place plans
to create the future. This particular image is associated with his plans
for EPCOT, his Experimental Prototype Community Of Tomorrow. I’d like
to point out that this image is from 1960 when Walt Disney was also
planning his displays for the 1964 World’s Fair (what would become It’s A
Small World and The Carousel of Progress). Walt never lived to see
EPCOT open but his flair for looking into the future appeared in the
rides as I will show in a future article. At this point, we note that he
looked at the future with ideas about community, centralization of
services, and the importance of neighborhoods.

Also in 1960, the first videoconferencing was conducted. This gives us the sharing of live video and audio.

1965 This paleo futuristic cartoon seems to predict a dire future of robots giving instruction.

“Robot teacher from the December 5, 1965 edition of the Sunday comic strip Our New Age” Source: Novak Archive.

But
look closely at the prediction: “Compressed speech will help
communications. From talking with pilots, to teaching reading. Future
school children may hear their lessons at twice the rate and understand
them better!”

Did they get that wrong? Ever noticed this choice at YouTube? [I’m not implying that learners can learn at a higher speed, I’m pointing to the availability of speeding up videos– a different thing altogether.]

YouTube playback speed choices

1966 Have another cartoon prediction.

Source: http://publicdomainreview.org/collections/france-in-the-year-2000-1899-1910/

“By
2016, man’s intelligence and intellect will be able to be increased by
drugs and by linking human brains directly to computers.”

Well, my intellect is increased by coffee. I won’t speak for you.

Part 1 380 B.C. to 1880

Part 2 1881 to 1909

Part 3 1910 to 1965

Part 4 1966 – 1998

Part 5 1999 – 2013

Part 6 2014 – Future

#Reality
#CrossReality #MixedReality #VirtualReality #AugmentedReality
#VirtualWorlds #Design #Transmedia #XR #VR #AR #ARVRinEdu #EdTech
#Innovation #Change #WaltDisney #Epcot #ProgressCity #JeanMarcCote
#CigarBox #Year2000 #PaleoFuture #Sensorama #ThomasEdison

This article originally posted on LinkedIn on November 29, 2021. Updated February 24, 2026 with a better font and re-added images.

November 10, 2021
A History of XR Cross Reality Part 2 of 6

Jules Chéret, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

As a reminder, we are using science fiction as our time
machine vehicle to examine how good we are at predicting the future and
our intention is to predict the future of cross realities (XR).

1881 – 1909

1881
– The invention of the theater phone (theatrophone) allowed users to
listen to the live opera from a location up to 1 mile away from the
theater. So you do not have to be there to be there.

Münzbetriebenes Empfangsgerät des de:Theatrophons. Circa 1892. Work is considered to be in the public domain in the US.

1882 Paleo futuristic image showing opera attendees in the future year 2000.
In case you are checking your watch, that’s 2 decades ago as of this
writing. Did I miss fish cars? Lizard cars? Actually, never mind. I
don’t think you’d find me going to the opera regardless of the kind of
car.

Villemard, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

1895
H.G. Wells published The Time Machine as a dystopian future view. Wells
was living in rural England and was seeing the industrial revolution
expand. He saw large factory cities swallow up young workers for long
hours in dark conditions and producing to satisfy an seemingly
insatiable consumer. He looked forward and saw a future where humanity
would become split into two groups that would almost would never interact.

Author Herbert George WellsPublisher William Heinemann, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

On
the surface was a Greek god-like existence of Eloi. They all looked
alike. (Shivers.) This group would be the consumers. They would benefit
from this world order but simultaneously be oblivious to the price for
their existence. They would be a small group, the 1%.

The
underground dwellers, the Morlocks, would run all of the machinery. They
would be the producers, and the generations of being underground would
allow for adaptations of evolution including large eyes, intolerance of
sunlight, and flesh-eating.

E.M. Forster read The Time Machine and rejected this future that H.G. Well foresaw.

However,
before we get to Forster’s publication, we visit one other futurist. In
1901, Frank Baum (of The Wizard of Oz) published The Master Key which
contains the first known reference in writing to what we would recognize
today as augmented reality:

William Wallace Denslow, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

“On
the other hand,” continued the Demon, “some people with fierce
countenances are kindly by nature, and many who appear to be evil are in
reality honorable and trustworthy. Therefore, that you may judge all
your fellow-creatures truly, and know upon whom to depend, I give you
the Character Marker. It consists of this pair of spectacles. While you
wear them every one you meet will be marked upon the forehead with a
letter indicating his or her character. The good will bear the letter
‘G,’ the evil the letter ‘E.’ The wise will be marked with a ‘W’ and the
foolish with an ‘F.’ The kind will show a ‘K’ upon their foreheads and
the cruel a letter ‘C.’ Thus you may determine by a single look the true
natures of all those you encounter.”

“And are these,
also, electrical in their construction?” asked the boy, as he took the
spectacles… All character sends out certain electrical vibrations, which
these spectacles concentrate in their lenses and exhibit to the gaze of
their wearer, as I have explained.”

“It’s a fine idea,” said the boy; “who discovered it?”

“It is a fact that has always existed, but is now utilized for the first time.” [A wonderful Wizard of Oz-like sense of humor. Making fun of the fantastical, but obvious.]

In December 1909, E.M. Forster publishes The Machine Stops. If
you have a chance to read it, I encourage that. It is a remarkable
story. If you substitute “the Internet” for “the Machine,” the story is
eerily accurate in some predictions of humanity. There is also very
interesting economy where humanity values the exchange of ideas above all other concepts (cough, Instagram, Twitter/X, Mastadon, Bluesky, etc.).

Short summary:

In
the future, everyone lives underground in these large columns of cells
because the surface is inhabitable. Each person lives in a cell that is
of a small defined space, one person per cell. The collections of people
are like bee hives. Everything a person needs to live is brought to
them in their cell by the Machine. Food, air, water, and once a day the
cell (and the person) are washed clean. The humans never meet or touch
in any way. They listen to concerts, speeches, and read books.

The
plot of the story unfolds with a son that yearns to escape to the
surface world; he believes it might be inhabitable and as such, holds
new promise for humanity. At first, he tells his mother about his desire
to leave via the Machine (a progenitor to Skype?) but the Machine,
intercepting the message, always fuzzes out when people express
unhappiness with the current order of things (cough, Facebook experiment).
Thus, the mother does not understand her son’s intent. She tries to
dismiss her worries. The son becomes insistent and travels to visit his
mother in person. When they meet, the mother is bothered by human touch.
He insists that he’s been on an exploratory climb and that he knows
other youth that are going to leave too. She will not leave the hive,
she cannot understand why anyone would leave the Machine. He leaves and
finds a livable world on the surface. The Machine, without humans to
service it, eventually breaks down and everyone remaining underground
dies; not because they are unable to leave, but because they lack the fortitude to do so.

Forster’s future vision does not have cannibalism but it highlights an amazing weakness; that the more humans depend on machines, the less human we will essentially become. Forster seems to argue that the human connection to the natural world is our salvation; a lesson not lost in 2019.

You’ve
finished a great deal of time travel but this was the slowest feeling
part of our journey. We’ll start speeding up in Part 3 which will
publish on November 29, 2019.

Part 1 380 B.C. to 1880

Part 2 1881 to 1909

Part 3 1910 to 1965

Part 4 1966 – 1998

Part 5 1999 – 2013

Part 6 2014 – Future

#Reality
#CrossReality #MixedReality #VirtualReality #AugmentedReality
#VirtualWorlds #Design #Transmedia #XR #VR #AR #ARVRinEdu #EdTech
#Innovation #Change #HGWells #EMForster #TheMachineStops #TheTimeMachine
#TheMasterKey #FrankBaum #TheaterPhone

Originally posted in November 2019. Updated on February 24, 2026 with changed font and re-added images.

November 10, 2021
A History of XR Cross Reality Part 1 of 6

“The longer you can look back, the farther you can look forward.” ~Winston Churchill.

This
the first of six articles describing a history of cross reality,
otherwise known as mixed reality or XR, which encompasses the fields of
virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), and virtual worlds (VW). I
have used the lens of science fiction as my time travel machine. This
is not meant as an exhaustive history, as I purposely chose my timeline.
Also in this effort, I engaged pattern-seeking from design research to
sharpen my prediction skills.

These articles started with two
recent research efforts: 1) an invitation to present on any topic at a
local university and 2) a project to forecast the future of XR
technology. As a result, I decided to craft a story, the history of XR.

Said another way, there is a reason this article series is called “A History…”. It is because it is one chosen history.

There are many possible others. For example, some will trace a purely technological history and start with Morton Heilig’s Sensorama device. Others will trace the use of alternative realities and perhaps start with flight simulators.

When I went to find the origins of science fiction, my research indicated that I should start first with paleo futurism. Paleo futurism
is the study of how, in the past, we envisioned the future. Said
another way, we have guessed about the future before. How good are we at
guessing? Once I did some research in paleo futurism, I found that I needed to look to utopian/dystopian literature as the origins of alternative realities in human thought.

Photo by Constantinos Kollias on Unsplash

That brings our time machine’s first stop back to 380 B.C. and Plato’s Republic.

Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=1181161

This
is argued to be the first instance of humankind writing about an
alternative reality for themselves. Plato focused this reality not on
city planning or public education, but on the concept of justice. Plato
pitted 4 different definitions of justice against each other to see how
humanity fared. At least up until 1900, it is a very strong bet that
the rest of our science fiction sources know of this foundation.

(Note:
there may be non-Western roots of alternative realities that go further
back than 380 B.C. My choice to start with Plato simply reflects a place
where I was comfortable starting.)

Our next stop is the early 1500s A.D. What was happening on Earth?

Columbus
had made 2 journeys to the “New World” Undoubtedly, knowledge that new
lands had been discovered was spreading across Europe. The slave trade
had begun.

Bry, Theodor de,, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

The Pacific Ocean had just been discovered.

Globalism is on the rise. Colonialism is not far behind.

In
1516, under King Henry the 8th, Brian Tuke was established as the first
Master of the Posts, the progenitor of the Royal Mail.

In Germany, a law established that only water, barley, and hops are the allowed ingredients to make beer.

In
China, the Nantan meteorite fell to Earth. The fall of this meteorite
was eye-witnessed by a farmer in a field and it was a rare iron-nickel
meteorite.

One of the final battles for the Holy Land was won by the Ottomans, establishing the Ottoman empire.

The
Aztecs were in their post classical period. This image is from the
Aztec sun stone, showing the belief in a cyclical calendar. We’ll see
cycles later as a key to prediction.

Gary Todd, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons

The
first social housing was established in Bavaria—which still exists
today. Originally to live here, you had to have been a city resident for
the two prior years, have no source of income, and be a
Catholic. Widowed mothers were the primary residents.

In Venice, the first Jewish ghetto was established by law.

In
Florence, the first uffizi (office) was established for workers to come
to on a daily basis to do their work for the first “corporation.”

Txllxt TxllxT, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons

I’ve brought up all of these elements to show that humanity was in flux, in a period of change when new ideas were flooding many different cultures.

Then, in 1516 Thomas More published Utopia, the progenitor of science fiction.

The Folger Shakespeare Library, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons

As
I researched, I learned that the definition of utopia was not our
current meaning of perfection or “Eden.” Thomas More intended “Utopia”
to mean “nowhere” or “a place that does not exist.” The book was a
commentary that both supported and criticized socialism. Utopia had a
ruler for life but after he died, there is an election for a new
ruler. There was shared work, food, clothing, land, etc. Punishment for
crime, however, was severe. We would not recognize More’s concept of
justice today. Residents dug away at a peninsular to form the island of
Utopia. Interestingly, Utopia is not isolated for there are still ships
to other nations.

The very next year after Utopia was published,
Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the cathedral door and Canada was
discovered via the St. Lawrence River. This was a world deep in
change: new worlds, new religions, globalization, and also segregation
and slavery.

So we have our foundation of humans engaging with alternative realities. On to Part 2.

Part 1 380 B.C. to 1880

Part 2 1881 to 1909

Part 3 1910 to 1965

Part 4 1966 – 1998

Part 5 1999 – 2013

Part 6 2014 – Future

#Quotes
#WinstonChurchill #Reality #CrossReality #MixedReality #VirtualReality
#AugmentedReality #VirtualWorlds #Design #Plato #Republic #Utopia
#ThomasMore #1516 #Transmedia #XR #VR #AR #ARVRinEdu #EdTech #Innovation
#Athens #Globalization #Change

This article was originally posted to LinkedIn on November 17, 2019. Updated on February 24, 2026 with some slighted clarified writing, changed font, and re-added images.

(more…)

November 10, 2021
Here we go again…

Today’s entry in the XR and learning Hall of Shame isn’t an article, it’s literally what is being written as the summary of the article. I can’t make this stuff up. (And BoA was only last week, yo.)

I did not capture the poster’s name on Facebook to protect privacy. However, I’ll re-type their summary here:

“Immersive
virtual reality could improve learning by increasing positive affective
and cognitive processing, thereby supporting improved performance on
tests of learning outcome”

and here is the article Abstract:

As immersive virtual reality (IVR) systems proliferate in classrooms, it is important to
understand how they affect learning outcomes and the underlying affective and cog-
nitive processes that may cause these outcomes. Proponents argue that IVR could
improve learning by increasing positive affective and cognitive processing, thereby
supporting improved performance on tests of learning outcome, whereas opponents
of IVR contend that it could hurt learning by increasing distraction, thereby disrupting
cognitive learning processes and leading to poorer learning outcomes. In a media
comparison study, students viewed a biology lesson either as an interactive animated
journey in IVR or as a slideshow on a desktop monitor. Those who viewed the IVR
lesson performed significantly worse on transfer tests, reported higher emotional
arousal, reported more extraneous cognitive load and showed less engagement based
on EEG measures than those who viewed the slideshow lesson, with or without prac-
tice questions added to the lessons. Mediational analyses showed that the lower
retention scores for the IVR lesson were related to an increase in self-reported extra-
neous cognitive load and emotional arousal. These results support the notion that
immersive environments create high affective and cognitive distraction, which leads
to poorer learning outcomes than desktop environments. [Highlights added for emphasis]

The article is free to read here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jcal.12482 but as of November 9, 2021, you cannot download or print this article.

Basically the exact opposite of the summary written IS what the article is saying. I’ll rewrite:

Immersive
virtual reality could not improve learning by increasing positive affective
and cognitive processing, thereby not supporting improved performance on
tests of learning outcome.

I’ve just got one image to relay how this mis-reading of research makes me feel:

November 9, 2021
The Future of XR Headsets
Photo by Drew Graham on Unsplash

I’ve been working on a project to predict the future of XR technology
within a 5-10 year time frame. That means I’ve been reading research
reports, digging through Twitter posts for conference photos, and
reading thought pieces by some of the most valued opinions on XR in
industry and education.

Simultaneous to this project, I’ve been brushing up my skills in User Experience (UX) and my most favorite, Design Thinking.
One of the most fun aspects of Design Thinking is that I’m allowed to
let my inner empath run on full tilt. And it’s really great to let your
emotions run through bunny-filled sunshine meadows and just see what
she has to say about anything and everything. Let me tell you: she has
some real opinions on XR headsets. And almost ALL of those opinions
come from the images being used to portray headsets. Come along on this
mystical magical ride of the visuals of headsets.

At the end of
the journey, I will make a prediction about headsets. And as with
every project of mine, I’ve figured out how to work Disney into it (as much as possible).

As our starting point, I’ll state something very strongly. I’m sick of headsets where people are supposed to be wowed by XR. To
be realistic, 90% of XR headset images are these. I’ve gathered these
images from across the internet and to preserve some degree of
anonymity, I’m NOT providing the reference location. I’m not trying to
make fun of people. Please be clear on that. I’m commenting on *how we
are portraying XR to others* to, supposedly, encourage others to join
us in XR.

So
we have the “Oh my I’m surprised!” look. I think that’s what this photo
is trying to say. It’s possible she was frightened, but more on fear in
a little bit.

Honorable
mention in this category: hipster dude
looking…uh…surprised. Actually, he looks ‘tired and being forced to
look surprised’ but that could just be me overlaying college student
thoughts onto this photo.

The next one we have is the *very*
ubiquitous “Hey, we’re trying out headsets…somewhere.” I’ve got about
10 of these photos collected.

So
they are all smiling and facing the same direction. We’re supposed to
like that, right? Uh, remember that those headsets are designed to cut
off all vision except that which the designer wants you to see and those
are four women standing really close together in a public place. Where
is everyone’s hands? How did they know to stand that close together?
They were probably prompted and stood close together and *then* put the
headsets on. Yeah, that’s realistic. Is it any wonder that women, in
particular, note less comfort with XR?

Hey here’s a few more. Do you want to try yet?

I’m
solo and still comfortable standing here showing you this thing.
Wait…are you still there? Did walk away? Oo, a whole new way to
indicate non-interest at vendor tables if every vendor wore one! I
might like this.

We are friends and happy even though we can’t see each other…and you!

It’s a coincidence that those last two were Magic Leap. I’ve got nothing against Magic Leap.

Before we leave the emotional theme of happy, catch this image *from a real article*.

I
am so creeped out by this. If you don’t see it, look closely at the
mouth. Where is the mouth???? Why is the mouth from someone else????
Ah, the Hannibal Lecter of XR images.

And finally, before things get better, just remember that your XR headset isn’t this.

I got nothing for this. It’s so…nope…nothing. Someone help her.

So
back to the topic of the future. I’m asked occasionally which
technologies to invest in over the 5-10 year time frame that are winning
bets for XR. I’ve got a multiple-part article series coming on how I
arrived at my conclusions, so stay tuned for that. However, the more
XR headset images I’ve seen (like all of those images above),
the more I think we are doing a very poor job enticing new users into
XR. I feel like we are hitting all the wrong notes.

The more and
more I thought about what disturbs me about these headset images, the
more I realized that I saw a theme to headsets where I’m like ‘Yes, I
would try that,” and “Nope, I would not try that.” And here is a hint
to the theme:

Recall the custom that some fiction writers use to disguise some superheroes: they mask their eyes.
If the eyes are covered, we can’t completely know who it is. By day,
it’s just mild mannered Clark Kent. He can’t possibly be Superman.
Think that premise is just in stories? We block off someone’s eyes when
we want them to have anonymity in photos/video, etc. It seems we humans use eyes as our ultimate identification card.

While
headsets in VR are designed to take the user to different places and
times to experience the normal and phantasmagorical (<-love that
word), they do so by cutting off all view of the current space the user
is in. That’s on purpose. I got no beef with that. We have data that
these headsets *can* generate empathy. Great! I buy that too.

My problem is what if empathy when involving headsets is a two-way street?
What if I cannot believe that the user is truly impacted by an
experience until I see their eyes? Isn’t that the problem with all of
the prior VR headset images? You cannot see the user’s eyes. Ooo, so I
have hit on a real tech problem here. If I want to see the user’s eyes
and yet the user needs to see nothing of the real world in order to be
immersed in virtuality, how do we solve that problem? Right now,
headsets cannot answer to both sets of demands. However, I have also
never met a tech problem that hasn’t been able to be overcome.

The short term solution is already at hand and I’ve been discussing it on LinkedIn:
- The
  solution is that immersive headsets (mostly for VR, VW, and games) will
  do what they do best with full immersion. Said another way, Magic Leap
  and Oculus Quest– if they pursue full immersion activities, will be
  fine. We hope that the users are in a safe space with assistance
  available in case they fall or need some body space security.
- The
  solution is also that AR headsets (which are not designed for immersion
  but for information display) will focus on information display. Since
  AR is not quite pulling on the emotions as VR, it’s not as important to
  see the user’s eyes but, bonus points, I can see them.
My favorite headset therefore is…Microsoft Hololens.
It allows me to see the user’s eyes. It also has the body profile of
safety glasses (a familiar pattern). Also I believe that Microsoft is
following their own playbook that worked for Office Suite and they are
pumping the Hololens into the business market *first* and that will
create back pressure through education. (i.e. we’ve got to get some
Hololens headsets because our graduates will go out to work X job and
will be expected to have experience in headsets as part of the job
requirement.)

Said another way, as of today, let AR headsets do AR and let VR headsets do VR. Never the two shall meet. Until…

The future can and will contain headsets that will do both.
That’s my prediction. A user wearing AR technology will find their
way to their subway train, sit down, and switch over to a VR scene of
the latest episode of the Mandalorian.

OK, I realize it won’t be
*full* immersion but I think the tech is going to get better (refresh
rates, etc.) and users will accept non-full immersion. What makes me
predict that? I’ve been a glasses-wearer since kindergarten. Ask me if
it bothers me that about 30% of my field of vision at any given moment
is not in focus. Answer: Nope. Users will accommodate to non-immersive
VR.

Once at their destination, the headset will fade down the
immersion and fade up to a map to a restaurant and some jazzy music (or
what-have-you-AR-experience-on-demand).

How do I foresee that? As a designer, I look for patterns in what has successfully worked in the past to predict what will successfully work in the future.
So what do we have in the past or present that predicts that AR/VR
combined headsets will totally be a workable thing in the future?

Two things:
1. Sunglasses.
  (Not just regular glasses as I mentioned earlier.) I see a few
  commentators skeptical how comfortable users will be wearing glasses
  that they *don’t need to*, aka vanity glasses, aka AR glasses, just to
  get AR. I think it will very much work! Because I don’t think of them
  like glasses…I think of them like sunglasses. Sunglasses are the
  harbinger of wearable tech because as we know, there are many examples
  of people wearing sunglasses for reasons that have nothing to do with
  sun protection. If people are willing to wear sunglasses at night,
  wearing AR headsets whether or not one is using AR will be an easy idea
  (see: the wearable technology fashion industry).
2. The ubiquity of
  the smartphone space-wise currently to users’ bodies. I don’t think I’m
  going out on a limb when I say that most users keep their smartphones
  with a meter’s radius of their bodies. As I’ve said on LinkedIn (and I
  should get this embroidered on a cushion), smartphones are the gateway drug for AR.
  Users are getting very used to having customizable information at their
  fingertips (or voice, as it may be). Switching from that smartphone
  interface to our vision or auditory range? Easy. Consider it done.
Until we get to the future, a few recommendations:
- The emotional nuance possible via XR is stunning. Let’s stop using fear as our primary XR coinage.
  (I’m looking at you, Plank.) Emotional reactions such as peace, wonder,
  laughter, curiosity, sadness, and honor all have a place in XR. Those
  emotions are how you are going to get not just gamers into XR.
- Stop it with the “I’ve put on a headset and I’m amazed” images. Just stop. I am looking for other
  emotions or events expressed with headsets…it’s just my hobby to
  collect these now. I’ve made my own “wearing a headset and barfing!”
  image. I’m not posting it here yet. You are welcome.
- Debate
  me! My opinion has been shaped and formed on this topic over years.
  But I’m always open to new thoughts and different points of view!
What do you think?
- Did I pick on Magic Leap too much? Maybe.
- Am I paid to espouse Microsoft Hololens? I wish!
- What comes after AR glasses? Implants? Already on the way. #omega opthamaltics
I look forward to your comments.

P.S.
I totally held off picking on any LinkedIn personal account photos of
people wearing headsets. You are an interesting crowd. On one hand, I
admire that you are *clearly* sending the message that you are pro-XR.
Way to go! On the other hand, you are going to regret that image in 20
years. I’m just saying. And to the dude’s profile I saw last night
where you are wearing 3 headsets at once: You, sir, are next level bananas. Carry on.

#Transmedia
#virtual reality #virtualworlds #crossreality #mixedreality
#augmentedreality #design #AR #VR #XR #headsets #images #eyes #wearing
#Immersion #Glasses #future #Users #Problem #Experience #Technology
#Emotions #Empathy #Empath #UX #UXinXR #MicrosoftHololens #Disney
#IllWearMySunglassesAtNight

This article originally posted at LinkedIn on November 12, 2019

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/future-xr-headsets-heather-dodds
November 8, 2021
Grief…At A Distance

On remote teams, hold space for sadness.

I published my How to connect in remote teams post one month ago. But this post is about something ten times
more important. It’s not about celebrating and having good times with
your fellow remote workers. It is about the opposite. Of all of the twelve months of the year to pick from to really dwell on this topic, October is it; no better month than the one directly preceding Dia del Muertos or All Saints Day. We’re
decorating with black cats, skeletons, and coffins. This is the month
to acknowledge death as part of the circle of life. Depending on your
spiritual beliefs, death and loss are absolutely necessary in our
understanding of life. This article is for remote managers and it is
about the importance of holding space for grief.

(more…)

November 8, 2021