Just in case you think the article wasn't expansive enough in the possibilities for AR/VR business models, I'll just leave this here: <a href="http://www.varcrypt.com/info/" rel="nofollow">http://www.varcrypt.com/info/</a><p>> VARcrypt is the world's first blockchain content distribution platform designed specifically for VR (Virtual Reality) and AR (Augmented Reality) content. VARcrypt derives its name from a combination of both VR (Virtual Reality) and AR (Augmented Reality) resulting in the combination of VAR which when mixed with a cryptographic blockchain content distribution and payment processing protocol combines to create VARcrypt. VARcrypt's blockchain will be powered by its own proprietary cryptocurrency, VARcoin. VARcoin will become its own medium of exchange for goods and services within the VARcrypt blockchain universe and beyond.<p>> The future of media will not be either VR or AR, it will be both, it will be VAR and that future will be brought to you by VARcrypt. VARcrypt is a place for artists, a place for content, a place for the future, because at VARcrypt we are breaking everything.<p>Sometimes I just love the startup world.
I think the enterprise chunk is too small in the info graphic. I envision a pretty huge market, especially for AR. There are very few AR applications that seem viable from a business model POV right now. The ones that are pretty easy to spot tend to be in the enterprise world. It seems like a very valuable technology along the entire supply chain from R&D (for building machines, automobiles etc.) to distribution (try on this dress in AR = less returns = higher margins; we can offer this kitchen sink service online now with AR instructions).
AR is in fact already used and generating value in some enterprisy field, specifically marketing (mostly just "ZOMG cool" branding) and in logistics (dedicated AR glasses for warehousing)
<i>"AR/VR is the fourth major platform shift (after PC, web and mobile)."</i><p>Or maybe VR is just the next 3D TV. Remember 3D TV? 3D TV viewership peaked in 2013. Samsung killed off their entire 3D line in 2016.[1] Some other manufacturers still make them, but they're not selling.<p>We've already had AR. It was called "Google Glass".<p>[1] <a href="http://www.whathifi.com/news/samsung-announces-15-new-tv-ranges-2016-kills-3d" rel="nofollow">http://www.whathifi.com/news/samsung-announces-15-new-tv-ran...</a>
Quick caveat, this is written by the same firm (Digi-Capital) that came out with a totally preposterous estimate (on the high side) for the market potential and uptake speed of VR.<p>So, you know, grain of salt; the Digi-Capital numbers were followed by much more sane (and significantly smaller) numbers from Piper Jaffray and others. Digi-Capital then revised their numbers so they didn't look like quite such an outlier.
Every time AR is discussed, I link to the CC-BY-NC comic <i>Vision Machine</i>.[1] As all good SF, it describes current trends with a veneer of future technology; I find that it offers insight on a lot of use cases for AR and VR.<p>[1] <a href="http://visionmachine.net/" rel="nofollow">http://visionmachine.net/</a>
While not specifically about the business model, where I really think that both will shine is in encouraging a separation of user from chair, getting them active and possible even turning AR/VR into a fitness movement. I've been working on the side on a UE4 based game, and as I realize the potential for it's use in fitness, especially with Vive style roomspace-play, the more I think it will be a huge industry of VR fitness. Maybe I can ride that wave, maybe not, but I hope to see it regardless.
I can still think of a few challenges.<p>First, like the Apple Watch, I do not think that consumers are keen to wear more objects every day. So this is a first challenge to AR being something we carry all the day like a mobile. The fact that it looks cool to a few techies doesn't warrant wide adoption.<p>Two, as it is, they require a lot of computing power. Computers aren't really getting any faster. Engraving may get a little thinner but I understand the physical limits are in sight. Will these things really become so power efficient that they become portable?<p>Then you have motion sickness which has more to do with the fact that we do not move while our eyes are telling us we are moving. This is something structural to VR. Though this should only apply to non static scenarios. But if you are sitting and using VR to work on a peripheral screen, if done well that shouldn't induce motion sickness. I would be tempted to consider the experience of 3D TVs as a warning.<p>It's not obvious to me VR will be such a big thing, outside of video games for a limited time per day.
The forecast is also leaving out this important application: playing Chevette Washington looking down upon San Francisco to see the city as it will be rebuilt by the tech titans mentioned. Honestly, I would pay for that.