>>293856824
>The hardware needs to be designed for fundamentally different things, trying to make it do both is going to make it worse
Not him, but this depends on the display/passthrough technology. AR and VR fortunately are so similar in the actual base technologies they use that there is not much difference other than in the displays. Under the logic that eventually we will reach perfect AR displays and perfect VR displays, there is no reason why we would want to limit ourselves to using a VR display anymore, since perfecting an AR display means that it can go opaque on a per-pixel level, which then means we're already in VR if the entire screen goes opaque. Alternatively, we can perfect passthrough, and along with a perfect VR display, it would also work as an AR headset, and there might be no reason to use an AR display anymore. Depends on how display technologies advance. If we don't reach those points then what will happen is that we'll get headsets that focus on and do one thing better than the other, but can still do both relatively well. It's reasonable what could happen is a headset with an interchangeable display, one made for VR, and one made for AR. AR and VR headsets will standardize on split architectures where the processing power, battery, etc, is separate from the display anyway, whether they place it in a unit you pouch somewhere, or on the back of your head on the strap.