For well over a year now I have been paying close attention to the Head Mounted Display market and what it offers to both consumers and industry. Back in 2006 I spent a year working on Augmented Reality, which required me to look closely unto this type of device. What I saw then, and the developments since, have been quite interesting.

Today, we have a growing niche within the HMD industry for products aimed as accesories to today’s portable media players. Before this, HMDs were reserved for virtual reality. Seeing this opportunity, several companies have jumped to fill this new niche. And yet, there isn’t one among them that can claim a resounding success.

Several generations of these mass-market HMDs have already come and gone, and each has made their contribution to the genre. However, even after years of evolution, all currently available HMDs seen to be missing the point entirely. I have yet to see an HMD that can be called stylish. I have yet to see one that can be called desirable. These seemingly simple concepts seem to escape HMD designers and as a result we keep getting products we do not want. Even the latest devices presented at CES 08′ at the beginning of the year fail to deliver in this regard, and while making their own advances and collaborations still leave us wanting.

Have you ever seen an HMD resembling the one rendered above? Regrettably, there are none, nor does it look like there will be any time soon.

Read on for an outlook on a market that doesn’t seem to grasp the wants and needs of its target audience…

The technology is already there, it’s been a couple of years already since the first mass market HMDs started showing up. The launch of the iPod with video a few years ago created a niche market for personal video monitors, and several companies jumped at the opportunity. These HMDs for personal media players differed from earlier units destined for virtual reality, since the later aimed at creating a truly enclosing and immersive experience and the former only tries to represent viewing a screen from a distance (i.e. a 60inch screen at 9feet).

The first units in this branch of HMD were rather big, unwieldy or generally unattractive. At first, units sought to completely isolate the user from his surroundings, offering “a more involving experience”. Then they realized this wasn’t VR, and that users still wanted to be aware of what was going on around them. Units started featuring small windows or mirrors to let the user see a little something at least. At this point (last year), devices had become considerably smaller since there was no longer a need for huge internal screens (no particular need for immersion). The resulting smaller form factor unfortunately started resembling a reference which has become their downfall… this Star Trek character. Products produced by Vuzix (formerly Icuiti), Myvu (formerly Micro Optical) and I-Vue fall into this category.

The technology used by most, if not all of these, consists of tiny screens mounted directly in front of each eye’s field of view. This article shows the Myvu’s internals in great detail; its displays aren’t completely frontal, but almost. In any case, whether directly in front or a little to the side results in the same configuration: internals go in front of the user’s face. This in turn mandates the general shape of all the aforementioned devices: About half as tall as normal eyeglasses and protruding towards the front.

As far as this HMD segment goes, this has now changed with the implementation of a technology normally reserved for Augmented Reality HMDs. According to this press release Lumus, a company dedicated to developing head mounted displays and related technologies, will be first to release an optical see-through HMD for personal media players.

What does this mean? “Optical see-though” refers to HMDs where the user is capable of seeing directly through the unit, as opposed to units where the user’s vision is stopped by the opaque screens where the image is displayed. Thus, optical see-through obviously requires that the unit’s displays and other internals not be in-front of the eye. Such HMDs generally use some kind of reflection to make the display viewable in the [transparent] lens right in front of the user’s eyes. This approach has some compromises though. First, as mentioned, the device’s internals cannot be in front, as is common for most current HMDs. The internal electronics must be placed elsewhere, which can easily deviate the form factor from the more inconspicuous (and desirable) eyeglass look. In their new video eyeglasses, Lumus has split the internals and placed them at each side, on the temples, right next to the lens, which allows for a much more eyeglass-like unit.

Lumus however doesn’t make any mention as to how they plan to handle an issue found on all optical see-through devices: opacity. Since the image seen by the viewer is a reflection on the transparent lens, what happens when the user wishes to block out the outside world? Transparent displays offer the possibility to superimpose digital information with real life, effectively allowing augmented reality applications. But if you want to watch a movie say at home or in an airplane, would you really want it to be transparent? To my knowledge, this issue hasn’t been technically resolved in any commercial optical see-through devices.

Then, there is style. Some companies have actually delivered attractive designs given their form factor and technological descriptions. If you take a look at the Myvu HMD, you will see it has a minimalistic shape with clean lines and a glossy finish, all coherent with current consumer electronic design trends. The Myvu unit is just set back by the fact that it doesn’t resemble eyeglasses, and that the front-internals layout gives it the Star Trek look. The target audience for these devices, technology trend-setters and early adopters definitely wont want to be associated with any nerdy references whatsoever.

Who is the target audience? Who would be willing to walk down the street wearing the HMD casually, wearing these as if they were normal sunglasses or actually watching something in the screens?

I can think of two initial types of consumer, and neither would be willing to sacrifice their personal appearance to satisfy their need for omnipresent screens. I can picture these would-be early adopters in two scenarios: First, a mobile businessman who is continually on the go, checking his schedule, answering his cellphone and making appointments while commuting from place to place. Second, a sportsman, someone who would benefit from being able to see a screen while running, hiking, weightlifting or doing other activities which would tie up his arms. Unfortunately, I don’t see either of these characters going through this if they were to become a focus of attention to others on account of a horrible piece of technology.

This is the part where all technological advances and outstanding product specs are rendered inconsequential due to really poor styling decisions and apparent blindness to your core audience. Getting back to Lumus, they claim in their press release that their optical see-through technology allows them to create an HMD which has an “Unobtrusive, natural look and feel of regular eyeglasses, which can be worn all day, even when screen is off”. Please follow this link to the Engadget article on this unit. Take a look at the promotional image for the item. Read Engadget’s opinion and take a look at the consumer’s reception in the comments section. Would you wear those in public? In an age where Apple reigns supreme in terms of design everyone else should be taking pages from their book. Can you imagine the Mac character from the “I’m a Mac, I’m a PC” commercials wearing the Lumus HMD in public? No? Now can you imagine the PC character wearing them? Maybe? Well, no one wants to be the PC character.

This fact has been holding back all current participants in this market. A few weeks ago at CES 08′ Myvu presented their new lineup. While the two units shown (named: Crystal and Shades) are a relative improvement in terms of overall design, “Shades” does stand out in its ability to replicate normal sunglasses better than any other HMD before it. It is, however, still quite a few steps away from the stylings of leading eyewear manufacturers such as Oakley. Why do I choose to mention Oakley? Because Oakley are the makers of the Thump line of mp3 player / sunglasses hybrid units and the ROKR bluetooth headphones / sunglasses. Even though initially they didn’t strike gold with these devices (the Thump in particular) through trial and error Oakley managed to find a shape and styling not merely inconspicuous, but actually quite desirable.

Lumus has since then defended themselves by stating that their product is just a reference model or proof of concept for their technology (I’m pretty sure this wasn’t originally published on their site). Even then, the chosen form factor to showcase their technology leaves something to be desired. Even though it makes a for a very simple and clear showing of their technology it fails to demonstrate how said technology can change the HMD market by allowing the creation of unobstrusive, non-geeky devices. Their marketing team makes matters worse by promoting their device with claims such as: “Utilizing Lumus’ patented LOE (Light-guide Optical Element) technology, they eliminate all the complaints about existing personal display solutions – too heavy, too bulky, too geeky, too cheap-looking, too uncomfortable, too immersive.” which only helps to accentuate how they are not meeting their own parameters with their reference model.

What conditions an HMD unit should satisfy to become a desirable tech product for today’s market is very likely to depend on overcoming the faults which have kept away the previously mentioned target audience. An HMD designed to be worn in public should not resemble anything other than eyeglasses or sunglasses. Not a toy, not a movie prop, not a nerdy version of either. It should be undetectable to people unfamiliar with the product. No blinking lights on the unit either. However, since this would be a $200-$300 product, it should look the part regardless of the inconspicuity factor mentioned earlier.

If the internal electronics are taking too much space, don’t hesitate to move parts of the unit to other parts of the body. Maintain the eyeglass form factor by whatever means necessary. If that means you must carry a small battery pack attached to your belt to power the unit, so be it. That is a minor inconvenience compared to getting looks every single time you have an unsightly unit on. Portable media players that are capable of outputting a video signal such as the iPod video or the Archos 604 will already be somewhere near your waist, so one more attachment shouldn’t be much of an issue in terms of user behavior.

Finally, make the wearer proud. Ever met an iPhone user who wasn’t ready and willing to show you his phone? Current trends in both consumer electronics and eyewear must be taken into account, and that generally means simple shapes, clean lines, small number of colors/textures/materials. But since the target demography here is of a younger sort, some of the flair in current eyeglasses must be thrown in for good measure.

The image you saw at the top of this post is a quick 2D render of my initial idea of what an HMD should look like to find success as an accessory in the portable media player market. The unit resembles thick eyeglasses, not unlike the form factor used by the Oakley Thump 2. The thick temples should accommodate the same electronic componentsused in Lumus-Opticals’ unit. A thumb-shaped recess is the power button, and little lights/buttons were to control the other functions.

Considering who the target audience is, I made a second variation, the one you see above. I removed the little lights and tried to make the unit as inconspicuous as possible through cleaner lines and a smaller earpiece. I also made the temples even thicker, in case more space was needed for the internal electronics and to prove that thicker doesn’t necessarily mean less attractive.

Finally, I chose to take the unit a step further in terms of styling, looking to create a bolder design that would be able to communicate brand identity and hopefully awaken an emotional response from consumers. On second thought, if going down this road it should probably be even bolder, but without disregarding the criteria established earlier.

An interesting option would be to develop a two-piece HMD which allowed the unit’s face (meaning the lenses and bridge) to detach from the temples and frame. This would allow a degree of customization that would in turn create a product appealing to a broader set of consumers.

Perhaps in the future I will look into this option.

[UPDATE] On April 17 2008 unwiredview.com uncovered an Apple patent application for HMDs which separates the processing part of the device from the head mounted unit. This would allow for a smaller and subtler head unit since most of the electronics would go on a separate unit close to the wearer’s waist; the same I suggested above.