Holo vs VR vs MR vs AR vs any other reality (All realities)

[VRdommy]

Intel Project Alloy - A Must Read
http://www.pcworld.com/article/3108...first-open-source-third-party-vr-headset.html

The pace of change with new VR product designs is about to increase exponentially.
And while this is one thing to move that along, it's not the only thing.

...MORE...
http://www.trustedreviews.com/news/intel-project-alloy-vr-ar-merged-reality

 

[Andreas B.]

holop2e.com
holostreamer.com
holoimpression.com

 

[Elad n]

At the time was a great sale that helped me diversify and buy other names.
No way ill sell for that amount now though.
the name was owned by me and a partner.
Price was about 13K in cash + we got in exchange ShortStories.com which we sold later for 22k +we also got XRGaming.com

So we are good and sure the new owner will make tons of money from it.

 

[Elad n]

I do own MetaversePorn now

 

[xr reality]

At the time was a great sale that helped me diversify and buy other names.
No way ill sell for that amount now though.
the name was owned by me and a partner.
Price was about 13K in cash + we got in exchange ShortStories.com which we sold later for 22k +we also got XRGaming.com

So we are good and sure the new owner will make tons of money from it.

Still good sale mate 13k cash plus name / sold 22k and xrgaming great name

 

[cordoba]

Surprises me that AR is above VR.

MR is clearly a very broad abbreviation;
I would prefer XR over MR, even for miXed reality

You really need to attach a keyword to those ("mr games" vs "ar games"), or else compare "virtual reality" + "augmented reality" + "mixed reality" etc.

 

[Centauri]

At the time was a great sale that helped me diversify and buy other names.
No way ill sell for that amount now though.
the name was owned by me and a partner.
Price was about 13K in cash + we got in exchange ShortStories.com which we sold later for 22k +we also got XRGaming.com

So we are good and sure the new owner will make tons of money from it.

Please may I ask, just for clarification:
What name were you talking about (sold for 13k)?!

I read the thread and couldn't find what name you mean...

 

[Elad n]

Please may I ask, just for clarification:
What name were you talking about (sold for 13k)?!

I read the thread and couldn't find what name you mean...

XRPorn

 

[Centauri]

This seems to be no joke
(or a very awkward & cringe one).

VR headset made to act. kill it's user, when he dies in a game ("blow off the head").
Created by the oculus founder himself.
https://www.euronews.com/next/2022/...-that-actually-kills-you-if-you-die-in-a-game

I don't know if I can laugh or not.

 

[VRdommy]

Once again, I will remind all that looking at search data right now tells you what?
who is curious about what? for there are not much to see when you get results.

When there is more than 500 million HMDs of whatever flavor tech you pick, that might be different.

@Boston Domainer was correct in his analogy of cyberspace as I have used that one several times right here.

When folks are using search to find actual products, the data will actually mean something.
And domain demand will follow that trend in many but not all ways.
For it is user search that makes keywords valuable.
No matter what we want to call it, the actual terms they use will determine it. Will that be determined by advertising and co's talk.... remains to be seen.

So, it is what I was saying, beware of new keywords that make your holding irrelevant.
Just how many times in just this thread have anyone thought the latest keyword was going to wipe-out the previous.
And they are all still here. I still think they will all be valid in some way in different proportions.

 

[BostonDomainer]

Just noticed the parenthesis part of the title of this thread....

I did acquire All/Realities./com earlier this year. My hunch was a company might want it to kind of say, hey Meta Platform, you want to make meta yours.... well we'll take AR and reframe and repurpose it to mean All Realities? .... I might of overthought this? lol.

 

[VRdommy]

Just noticed the parenthesis part of the title of this thread....

I did acquire All/Realities./com earlier this year. My hunch was a company might want it to kind of say, hey Meta Platform, you want to make meta yours.... well we'll take AR and reframe and repurpose it to mean All Realities? .... I might of overthought this? lol.

Well, we all do that overthinking from time to time.
I have seen nothing new in the last 2 years to change my thinking or outlook. But some things have changed my timelines a bit. But not far. And you know I have always projected this in the long.
My AR/MR and XR holdings are at a minimum. I was buying AR names pre 2010 (not many). But they are fair quality and I will likely have no complaint.
I just did not put to much money 'on the table' for it. I maintain less overhead for it.
Already dumped most all of my meta names to resellers anyway. I just don't see 'broad and deep' use where it counts. Perhaps in the very long ? I don't intend to play this niche 10 years from now. Sell'm till they are gone.

The bulk of my niche holdings are really virtual places/spaces. That sums it up pretty well. That is the broad and I doubt any one will be really deep as there is just to many sub-niches of/for this.
And I'm still looking at years to get the value I think they can bring.
So, yea, I'm still long. Just not as long anymore... LOL

Great to see ya on the board again ! Hope all has been well.

 

[cordoba]

XRP**n

Of course you shouldn't have any regrets, but that is certainly a name that could be worth 7 figures in a few years. You probably got far more of a deal for it though than both VRP**n and ARP**n, which both went for peanuts as far as I'm aware.

 

[cordoba]

Well, we all do that overthinking from time to time.
I have seen nothing new in the last 2 years to change my thinking or outlook. But some things have changed my timelines a bit. But not far. And you know I have always projected this in the long.
My AR/MR and XR holdings are at a minimum. I was buying AR names pre 2010 (not many). But they are fair quality and I will likely have no complaint.
I just did not put to much money 'on the table' for it. I maintain less overhead for it.
Already dumped most all of my meta names to resellers anyway. I just don't see 'broad and deep' use where it counts. Perhaps in the very long ? I don't intend to play this niche 10 years from now. Sell'm till they are gone.

The bulk of my niche holdings are really virtual places/spaces. That sums it up pretty well. That is the broad and I doubt any one will be really deep as there is just to many sub-niches of/for this.
And I'm still looking at years to get the value I think they can bring.
So, yea, I'm still long. Just not as long anymore... LOL

Great to see ya on the board again ! Hope all has been well.

Boston Domainer made some great points as regards the comparison with 'cyberspace'. I just wonder though, would things would have been different regarding terms like 'cyber security' if back in 1998 or whenever, Microsoft (or perhaps AOL) had decided to rebrand themselves as 'Cyber'? Not to mention that Microsoft and Gates were never as unpopular as Zuckerberg and Facebook/Meta is today.

 

[cordoba]

This seems to be no joke
(or a very awkward & cringe one).

VR headset made to act. kill it's user, when he dies in a game ("blow off the head").
Created by the oculus founder himself.
https://www.euronews.com/next/2022/...-that-actually-kills-you-if-you-die-in-a-game

I don't know if I can laugh or not.

I don't know what the purpose of Luckey Palmer is in doing that. It has to be just a marketing exercise to get himself back in the news. It's an interesting idea as to how we could make VR games more immersive and real in terms of 'consequences'. The new PSVR 2 has haptic feedback in the headset itself. So you could 'feel' yourself getting hit in the head a little during games or VR boxing. Just from that, I can see Sony leaving themselves open to law suits claiming 'brain damage' in the future.

 

[Elad n]

Of course you shouldn't have any regrets, but that is certainly a name that could be worth 7 figures in a few years. You probably got far more of a deal for it though than both VRP**n and ARP**n, which both went for peanuts as far as I'm aware.

A necessary move for growth.
My portfolio is much stronger now partially thanks to that trade so we good .
Hope new owner will make 7 figures.

 

[VRdommy]

Boston Domainer made some great points as regards the comparison with 'cyberspace'. I just wonder though, would things would have been different regarding terms like 'cyber security' if back in 1998 or whenever, Microsoft (or perhaps AOL) had decided to rebrand themselves as 'Cyber'? Not to mention that Microsoft and Gates were never as unpopular as Zuckerberg and Facebook/Meta is today.

Just noticed the parenthesis part of the title of this thread....

I did acquire All/Realities./com earlier this year. My hunch was a company might want it to kind of say, hey Meta Platform, you want to make meta yours.... well we'll take AR and reframe and repurpose it to mean All Realities? .... I might of overthought this? lol.

Well, we do have this thing today that we did not have then.
gTLDs
You simply can not corner that many names. Plenty of alternatives. That puts a crimp on the depth/valuation. Acceptance of gTLD's is ongoing.
Especially where it compliments the name.
I have been aware of it for a few years and bought the gTLD's of my better .com's where it compliments it.
i.e. teleportertours / teleporter.tours will sell as a package.
One has to re-think the position you hold now compared to just 5 years ago.
While I am sure most names will have broad use, it's the depth I question for many, not all.

The rest we are still waiting to see.... the exact terms... I am a betting man and placed my bets.
But I see it as a evolving thing. What stands out in the beginning will quickly change ever faster
I can only advise not to dump if it does not look like it's not going your way. You likely have had time to review and do that already. But now the horse race is about to begin. This is what you have waited for with a paid seat. Don't tear up that ticket just yet.

But cyber/cyberspace is something I have pointed out several times here and we made it long enough to see that in the rear-view mirror. But that term was not alone. I remember that became one of the largest pick-ups of that time. You can look back at the sales history and see the investor ONLY speculation. And there were some big ones many of us would be happy with.

Does CYBERSPORTS look like a 18k name today ?
CYBER has taken new descriptors. More refined to exact tech. Cyber was to broad.
It kinda means 'virtual'... cyberspace = virtual space.
Can you imagine VRSPORTS a 18k name ? OK $25 with inflation...LOL
Of course you can and likely more.
Ever changing.
Gotta know when to get out while it's hot. Greed gets the best of us sometimes.

 

[Digital Nomad]

Apple might be building its own version of the metaverse​

https://www.phonearena.com/news/Apple-might-be-building-its-own-version-of-the-metaverse_id143660​

It is hardly a secret that Apple has big plans for AR/VR technology - Tim Cook even went as far as saying that that could be the “next big thing”.

Now we are getting the first taste of just how far the Cupertino company is willing to go. Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman reports that Apple is now beginning to work on a whole “3D mixed-reality world” and is seeking out new talent to that end.

This information is based on a recent Apple job listing and was first brought forward by Gurman himself in the latest edition of his Power On newsletter. According to the prominent tech pundit, whose track record concerning Apple leaks is impeccable, the Cupertino company could be building a virtual environment similar to Mark Zuckerberg’s “metaverse”. Gurman jokingly quips that the controversial term will never be officially used by the company. Regardless of how Apple decides to name this virtual universe, one thing is certain - the rumored VR/AR headset is only the beginning.

With Google also set to enter the fray with a headset of its own sooner rather than later, no less than three American tech giants will be looking to pave the way for our VR/AR future. It seems Tim Cook was right - that truly is “the next big thing”.

 

[cordoba]

With Google also set to enter the fray with a headset of its own sooner rather than later, no less than three American tech giants will be looking to pave the way for our VR/AR future. It seems Tim Cook was right - that truly is “the next big thing”.

Yeah, it's funny the way Zuck and Meta are being pilloried for their Metaverse ambitions, when Apple and others have a near identical vision. As we've always said, there's not a chance that Apple will ever use the metaverse term, and likely the same with Google. I think Microsoft are the only other big tech company that have used it, and they seem to have tied up with Meta for VR/AR currently. Now that the idea of the metaverse has been ridiculed to the point it will take at least a decade for it to recover, if Apple does successfully create a virtual world that even goes partly mainstream in the next decade, you can be sure that the metaverse term will fall almost completely out of popular usage.

 

[Digital Nomad]

Yeah, it's funny the way Zuck and Meta are being pilloried for their Metaverse ambitions, when Apple and others have a near identical vision. As we've always said, there's not a chance that Apple will ever use the metaverse term, and likely the same with Google. I think Microsoft are the only other big tech company that have used it, and they seem to have tied up with Meta for VR/AR currently. Now that the idea of the metaverse has been ridiculed to the point it will take at least a decade for it to recover, if Apple does successfully create a virtual world that even goes partly mainstream in the next decade, you can be sure that the metaverse term will fall almost completely out of popular usage.

The video gaming industry was also ridiculed in the beginning, but succeeded, the future is uncertain, who knows what will happen or what names/terms will be used eventually, but it is still good to have some strong domains with "meta" and/or "verse" in them, you just never know.

 

[Elad n]

The video gaming industry was also ridiculed in the beginning, but succeeded, the future is uncertain, who knows what will happen or what names/terms will be used eventually, but it is still good to have some strong domains with "meta" and/or "verse" in them, you just never know.

Totally agree.

I have sold MetaverseGroup for 75k and got many offers for the rest.
@BostonDomainer sold some other names for 6 figures total and kept his strong ones.
Some of us already made a lot of money in XR, so that's Great.
Diversify and keep in mind more than one term will be used.
We are already seeing it.
Companies with AR VR XR immersive Holo meta verse Metaverse in their names and it's only the beginning as more and more companies will join this industry that is in it's infancy.

Good luck all.

 

[Digital Nomad]

Totally agree.

I have sold MetaverseGroup for 75k and got many offers for the rest.
@BostonDomainer sold some other names for 6 figures total and kept his strong ones.
Some of us already made a lot of money in XR, so that's Great.
Diversify and keep in mind more than one term will be used.
We are already seeing it.
Companies with AR VR XR immersive Holo meta verse Metaverse in their names and it's only the beginning as more and more companies will join this industry that is in it's infancy.

Good luck all.

Congrats on your nice sale. And yes I agree, diversify that's it, if one keyword fails you still have another, if one market fails you still have a chance in another.

 

[VRdommy]

Apple might be building its own version of the metaverse​

https://www.phonearena.com/news/Apple-might-be-building-its-own-version-of-the-metaverse_id143660​

It is hardly a secret that Apple has big plans for AR/VR technology - Tim Cook even went as far as saying that that could be the “next big thing”.

Now we are getting the first taste of just how far the Cupertino company is willing to go. Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman reports that Apple is now beginning to work on a whole “3D mixed-reality world” and is seeking out new talent to that end.

This information is based on a recent Apple job listing and was first brought forward by Gurman himself in the latest edition of his Power On newsletter. According to the prominent tech pundit, whose track record concerning Apple leaks is impeccable, the Cupertino company could be building a virtual environment similar to Mark Zuckerberg’s “metaverse”. Gurman jokingly quips that the controversial term will never be officially used by the company. Regardless of how Apple decides to name this virtual universe, one thing is certain - the rumored VR/AR headset is only the beginning.

With Google also set to enter the fray with a headset of its own sooner rather than later, no less than three American tech giants will be looking to pave the way for our VR/AR future. It seems Tim Cook was right - that truly is “the next big thing”.

Boston Domainer made some great points as regards the comparison with 'cyberspace'. I just wonder though, would things would have been different regarding terms like 'cyber security' if back in 1998 or whenever, Microsoft (or perhaps AOL) had decided to rebrand themselves as 'Cyber'? Not to mention that Microsoft and Gates were never as unpopular as Zuckerberg and Facebook/Meta is today.

Just noticed the parenthesis part of the title of this thread....

I did acquire All/Realities./com earlier this year. My hunch was a company might want it to kind of say, hey Meta Platform, you want to make meta yours.... well we'll take AR and reframe and repurpose it to mean All Realities? .... I might of overthought this? lol.

I doubt the price tag of the initial unit is any kind of mistake.
They do not want to push the consumer market just out of the gate.

I would compare it in style to google glass as far as release methods.
The price tag was $2k and it did not have $200 worth of tech.
It was intended to be a beta release for developers even though they knew that many consumers were going to grab one. It went far beyond their expectations even with the very high price tag.

So, this first release for Apple, will be similar. You gotta have APPS to run and they gotta be likeable or useful.
There will be something to do with the device, not just a paper weight or a few apps to demonstrate capability with some fun or utility, which is what they are working on right now.

Just the same, it is that time (opening to dev's) when we will see the start-ups needing the names. I expect most of these folks to be on a conservative budget until the market is proven.

Just think of how long before we see the first 500 apps. 6 months ? Divide that up for VR/AR/MR
That would be a fair starting point. Many would not be in most interests. Very diversified we hope. One of the most useful apps they can slip in the default line-up is 3D/VR movie player. That allows for a lot of content that is already out there and new stuff arriving all the time.
And some basic game stuff built in VR/AR/MR like a advanced PONG type stuff etc.
Just enough to keep you busy till outside dev's fill that void. And they will.

There is no library of AR or MR apps sitting out there waiting to be adapted to Apple's capability. It will be some time before we see a bunch of really good ones. But this is not the case with VR.

All food for thought in placing your timeline expectations.

 

[Digital Nomad]

I doubt the price tag of the initial unit is any kind of mistake.
They do not want to push the consumer market just out of the gate.

I would compare it in style to google glass as far as release methods.
The price tag was $2k and it did not have $200 worth of tech.
It was intended to be a beta release for developers even though they knew that many consumers were going to grab one. It went far beyond their expectations even with the very high price tag.

So, this first release for Apple, will be similar. You gotta have APPS to run and they gotta be likeable or useful.
There will be something to do with the device, not just a paper weight or a few apps to demonstrate capability with some fun or utility, which is what they are working on right now.

Just the same, it is that time (opening to dev's) when we will see the start-ups needing the names. I expect most of these folks to be on a conservative budget until the market is proven.

Just think of how long before we see the first 500 apps. 6 months ? Divide that up for VR/AR/MR
That would be a fair starting point. Many would not be in most interests. Very diversified we hope. One of the most useful apps they can slip in the default line-up is 3D/VR movie player. That allows for a lot of content that is already out there and new stuff arriving all the time.
And some basic game stuff built in VR/AR/MR like a advanced PONG type stuff etc.
Just enough to keep you busy till outside dev's fill that void. And they will.

There is no library of AR or MR apps sitting out there waiting to be adapted to Apple's capability. It will be some time before we see a bunch of really good ones. But this is not the case with VR.

All food for thought in placing your timeline expectations.

Yes, with the gaming world the problem was that every console of a different brand had their own games, it was still confusing. Until Mario Bros came along and that changed everything. There must be a good headset that is cheap and very good, and there has to be a killer app/game or whatever for the masses to really like it and then everything will change. I really believe this will happen one day, lets hope it to be sooner than later. It is quite exciting, have been watching and waiting for this for years now.

 

[Constantin S]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/news...ed-reality-world-games-video-service-lafgxl1e

 

[Digital Nomad]

Great posts by James Kim on Twitter.