Tuesday 27 January 2015

Microsoft's HoloLens explained: How it works and why it's different

By Nick Statt,

Microsoft has a vision for the future, and it involves terms and technology straight out of science fiction.

But are we actually glimpsing that future? Yes and no.

Microsoft's HoloLens, which the company unveiled at its Redmond, Wash., headquarters on Wednesday, is a sleek, flashy headset with transparent lenses. You can see the world around you, but suddenly that world is transformed -- with 3D objects floating in midair, virtual screens on the wall and your living room covered in virtual characters running amok.

Microsoft's HoloLens is no joke: My reality augmented with Skype, Minecraft
Technology companies have long promised to bring us the future now, reaching ahead 5 or 10 years to try to amaze consumers with the next big breakthrough. Hollywood, on the other hand, has shown that tech in action (or at least simulations of it).

In "Minority Report," for instance, Tom Cruise's character used sweeping, midair hand gestures and transparent screens to do police work. Five years later, Apple unveiled the iPhone, and with it, a touchscreen operated by hand and finger gestures. Microsoft in turn served up its Kinect gesture-control device, which tracks people's movements through space and feeds the data into an interface.

Going further, "The Matrix" showed hackers plugging computers into people's brains to transport them to imaginary cities. And in "Star Trek," computers used energy fields and visual tricks to create worlds people could touch and feel.

We're not even close to those scenarios yet, but we're taking tiny steps in that direction. Companies like Facebook, Google and Microsoft are now attempting to move that fiction toward reality, and the public is beginning to see those visions of tomorrow take form.

So how does the HoloLens measure up against other reality-altering gadgets?

What's a HoloLens, and how does it work?

Microsoft's HoloLens is not actually producing 3D images that everyone can see; this isn't "Star Trek."

Instead of everyone walking into a room made to reproduce 3D images, Microsoft's goggles show images only the wearer can see. Everyone else will just think you're wearing goofy-looking glasses.

Another key thing about HoloLens is what Microsoft is trying to accomplish.

The company is not trying to transport you to a different world, but rather bring the wonders of a computer directly to the one you're living in. Microsoft is overlaying images and objects onto our living rooms.

As a HoloLens wearer, you'll still see the real world in front of you. You can walk around and talk to others without worrying about bumping into walls.

The goggles will track your movements, watch your gaze and transform what you see by blasting light at your eyes (it doesn't hurt). Because the device tracks where you are, you can use hand gestures -- right now it's only a midair click by raising and lowering your finger -- to interact with the 3D images.

There's a whole bunch of other hardware that's designed to help the HoloLens' effects feel believable. The device has a plethora of sensors to sense your movements in a room and it uses this information along with layers of colored glass to create images you can interact with or investigate from different angles. Want to see the back of a virtual bike in the middle of your kitchen? Just walk to the other side of it.

The goggles also have a camera that looks at the room, so the HoloLens knows where tables, chairs and other objects are. It then uses that information to project 3D images on top of and even inside them -- place virtual dynamite on your desk and you might blow a hole to see what's inside.

That's just a gimmick, but Microsoft said it indicates potential. HoloLens, Microsoft said, can transform businesses and open up new possibilities for how we interact.

I used the HoloLens to video chat with a Microsoft employee who was using Skype on a tablet. Her task? To help me rewire a light switch. She accessed a camera on the HoloLens to see through my eyes, then she drew diagrams and arrows where I was looking to show me what tools to pick up and how to use them.

Imagine how these tricks could be used to train pilots or guide doctors through complex operations.

Different from the Rift

So how about the Oculus Rift? Created by Oculus VR, a startup Facebook purchased for more than $2 billion in March 2014, the headset is considered the poster child of the blossoming virtual reality market.

From a distance, Oculus' headset looks a bit like Microsoft's HoloLens in that it's a device worn on your head. But that's where the similarities end. Whereas Microsoft wants to help us interact with the real world in new ways, Oculus wants to immerse us in an entirely new world.

To put it simply, the Rift headset is a screen on your face. But when it's turned on, the images it produces trick your brain into thinking you've been teleported to a different world, like a starship out in space, or the the edge of a skyscraper. Oculus could, one day, take a more practical route, transporting you courtside to a live basketball game or to a sun-soaked beach to relax.


Oculus' Rift headset pushes a screen right up against your eyes, allowing the device to transport users to entirely different environments.
Nick Statt/CNET
The goal for Oculus is to trick the user into believing they're actually there -- wherever it's bringing you. That feeling is called "presence," an ambition Microsoft's HoloLens isn't reaching for.

Enthusiasts say that moment, where your brain is tricked into believing you're actually somewhere else, is magical.

"I've seen a handful of technology demos in my life that made me feel like I was glimpsing into the future," wrote venture capitalist Chris Dixon, who helped lead investment firm Andreessen Horowitz's funding in Oculus VR. "The best ones were: the Apple II, the Macintosh, Netscape, Google, the iPhone, and -- most recently -- the Oculus Rift."

Oculus isn't alone in its quest. Sony is attempting something similar with its Project Morpheus headset. Both have outspoken plans to use the technology to transform all manner of industries, starting with video games. But developers say it's hard to get it right. The images need to be carefully connected to your physical movements without any delays. When they aren't, consumers feel a form of motion sickness.

Same difference

Ultimately, these companies are on different roads to the same destination, which is trying to reimagine how we interact with computers. We're all used to the mouse and the keyboard, and we're learning to live with the glass screens of smartphones too. So far, each of these devices has been good enough to convey the information from a book or the scenes of a movie.

But Oculus, Microsoft, Google and others believe in a different, potentially more natural way to interact with our technology. These companies and the hardware they're creating imagine a world where hand gestures, 3D images and images superimposed on reality are the next-generation tools for productivity, communication and everything else we use gadgets and the Internet for.

It sounds like science fiction, but if these devices work the way tech luminaries hope they can, such dreams may be reality sooner than we think.


Thursday 15 January 2015

How Intel Gave Stephen Hawking a Voice

By Joao Medeiros,

Stephen Hawking first met Gordon Moore, the cofounder of Intel, at a conference in 1997. Moore noticed that Hawking’s computer, which he used to communicate, had an AMD processor and asked him if he preferred instead a “real computer” with an Intel micro-processor. Intel has been providing Hawking with customized PCs and technical support since then, replacing his computer every two years.

Hawking lost his ability to speak in 1985, when, on a trip to CERN in Geneva, he caught pneumonia. In the hospital, he was put on a ventilator. His condition was critical. The doctors asked Hawking’s then-wife, Jane, whether they should turn off the life support. She vehemently refused. Hawking was flown to Addenbrooke’s Hospital, in Cambridge, where the doctors managed to contain the infection. To help him breathe, they also performed a tracheotomy, which involved cutting a hole in his neck and placing a tube into his windpipe. As a result, Hawking irreversibly lost the ability to speak.

For a while, Hawking communicated using a spelling card, patiently indicating letters and forming words with a lift of his eyebrows. Martin King, a physicist who had been working with Hawking on a new communication system, contacted a California-based company called Words Plus, whose computer program Equalizer allowed the user to select words and commands on a computer using a hand clicker. King spoke to the CEO of Words Plus, Walter Woltosz, and asked if the software could help a physics professor in England with ALS. Woltosz had created an earlier version of Equalizer to help his mother-in-law, who also suffered from ALS and had lost her ability to speak and write. “I asked if it was Stephen Hawking, but he couldn’t give me a name without permission,” says Woltosz. “He called me the next day and confirmed it. I said I would donate whatever was needed.”

Equalizer first ran on an Apple II computer linked to a speech synthesizer made by a company called Speech Plus. This system was then adapted by David Mason, the engineer husband of one of Hawking’s nurses, to a portable system that could be mounted on one of the arms of a wheelchair. With this new system, Hawking was able to communicate at a rate of 15 words per minute.

However, the nerve that allowed him to move his thumbs kept degrading. By 2008, Hawking’s hand was too weak to use the clicker. His graduate assistant at the time then devised a switching device called the “cheek switch.” Attached to his glasses, it could detect, via a low infrared beam, when Hawking tensed his cheek muscle. Since then, Hawking has achieved the feat of writing emails, browsing the internet, writing books and speaking using only one muscle. Nevertheless, his ability to communicate continued to decline. By 2011, he managed only about one or two words per minute, so he sent a letter to Moore, saying: “My speech input is very, very slow these days. Is there any way Intel could help?”

Moore asked Justin Rattner, then Intel’s CTO, to look into the problem. Rattner assembled a team of experts on human-computer interaction from Intel Labs, which he brought over to Cambridge for Hawking’s 70th birthday conference, “The State of the Universe,” on January 8, 2012. “I brought a group of specialists with me from Intel Labs,” Rattner told the audience. “We’re going to be looking carefully at applying some state-of-the-art computing technology to improve Stephen’s communicating speed. We hope that this team has a breakthrough and identifies a technique that allows him to communicate at levels he had a few years ago.”

Hawking had been too ill to attend his own birthday party, so he met the Intel experts some weeks later at his office in the department of applied mathematics and theoretical physics at the University of Cambridge. The team of five included Horst Haussecker, the director of the Experience Technology Lab, Lama Nachman, the director of the Anticipatory Computing Lab and project head, and Pete Denman, an interaction designer. “Stephen has always been inspirational to me,” says Denman, who also uses a wheelchair. “After I broke my neck and became paralyzed, my mother gave me a copy of A Brief History of Time, which had just come out. She told me that people in wheelchairs can still do amazing things. Looking back, I realize how prophetic that was.”
After the Intel team introduced themselves, Haussecker took the lead, explaining why they were there and what their plans were. Haussecker continued speaking for 20 minutes, when, suddenly, Hawking spoke.

“He welcomed us and expressed how happy he was that we were there,” says Denman. “Unbeknown to us, he had been typing all that time. It took him 20 minutes to write a salutation of about 30 words. It stopped us all in our tracks. It was poignant. We now realized that this was going to be a much bigger problem than we thought.”

At the time, Hawking’s computer interface was a program called EZ Keys, an upgrade from the previous softwares and also designed by Words Plus. It provided him with a keyboard on the screen and a basic word-prediction algorithm. A cursor automatically scanned across the keyboard by row or by column and he could select a character by moving his cheek to stop the cursor. EZ Keys also allowed Hawking to control the mouse in Windows and operate other applications in his computer. He surfed the web with Firefox and wrote his lectures using Notepad. He also had a webcam that he used with Skype.

The Intel team envisaged an upheaval of Hawking’s archaic system, which would involve introducing new hardware. “Justin was thinking that we could use technology such as facial-gesture recognition, gaze tracking and brain-computer interfaces,” says Nachman. “Initially we fed him a lot of these wild ideas and tried a lot of off-the-shelf technologies.” Those attempts, more often than not, failed. Gaze tracking couldn’t lock on to Hawking’s gaze, because of the drooping of his eyelids. Before the Intel project, Hawking had tested EEG caps that could read his brainwaves and potentially transmit commands to his computer. Somehow, they couldn’t get a strong enough brain signal. “We would flash letters on the screen and it would try to select the right letter just by registering the brain’s response,” says Wood. “It worked fine with me, then Stephen tried it and it didn’t work well. They weren’t able to get a strong enough signal-to-noise.”

“The more we observed him and listened to his concerns, the more it dawned on us that what he was really asking, in addition to improving how fast he could communicate, was for new features that would let him interact better with his computer,” says Nachman. After returning to Intel Labs and after months of research, Denman prepared a 10-minute video to send to Hawking, delineating which new user-interface prototypes they wanted to implement and soliciting his feedback. “We came up with changes we felt would not drastically change how he used his system, but would still have a large impact,” says Denman. The changes included additions such as a “back button,” which Hawking could use not only to delete characters but to navigate a step back in his user interface; a predictive-word algorithm; and next-word navigation, which would let him choose words one after another rather than typing them.

The main change, in Denman’s view, was a prototype that tackled the biggest problem that Hawking had with his user interface: missed key-hits. “Stephen would often hit the wrong key by hitting the letter adjacent to the one he wanted,” says Denman. “He would miss the letter, go back, miss the letter again, go back. It was unbearably slow and he would get frustrated.” That particular problem was compounded by Hawking’s perfectionism. “It’s really important for him to have his thoughts articulated in exactly the right way and for the punctuation to be absolutely right,” says Nachman. “He learned to be patient enough to still be able to be a perfectionist. He’s not somebody who just wants to get the gist of the message across. He’s somebody who really wants it to be perfect.”

To address the missed key-hits, the Intel team added a prototype that would interpret Hawking’s intentions, rather than his actual input, using an algorithm similar to that used in word processing and mobile phones. “This is a tough interaction to put your faith into,” the video explained. “When the iPhone first entered the market, people complained about predictive text but quickly distrust turned to delight. The problem is that it takes a little time to get used to and you have to release control to let the system do the work. The addition of this feature could increase your speed and let you concentrate on content.”

The video concluded: “What’s your level of excitement or apprehension?” In June that year, Hawking visited Intel Labs, where Denman and his team introduced him to the new system, initially called ASTER (for ASsistive Text EditoR). “Your current piece of software is a little dated,” Denman told him. “Well, it’s very dated, but you’re very used to using it, so we’ve changed the method by which your next-word prediction works and it can pretty much pick up the correct word every single time, even if you’re letters away from it.”

“This is a big improvement over the previous version,” Hawking replied. “I really like it.”

They implemented the new user interface on Hawking’s computer. Denman thought they were on the right path. By September, they began to get feedback: Hawking wasn’t adapting to the new system. It was too complicated. Prototypes such as the back button, and the one addressing “missed key-hits,” proved confusing and had to be scrapped. “He’s one of the brightest guys in the world but we can’t forget that he hasn’t been exposed to modern technology,” says Denman. “He never had the opportunity to use an iPhone. We were trying to teach the world’s most famous and smartest 72-year-old grandfather to learn this new way of interacting with technology.”

Computer and speech synthesiser housing used by Stephen Hawking, 1999.
Computer and speech synthesiser housing used by Stephen Hawking, 1999.   Science Museum Photo Studio/Getty Images
Denman and the rest of the team realized that they had to start thinking differently about the problem. “We thought we were designing software in the traditional sense, where you throw out a huge net and try to catch as many fish as you can,” says Denman. “We didn’t realize how much the design would hinge on Stephen. We had to point a laser to study one individual.”
At the end of 2012, the Intel team set up a system that recorded how Hawking interacted with his computer. They recorded tens of hours of video that encompassed a range of different situations: Stephen typing, Stephen typing when tired, Stephen using the mouse, Stephen trying to get a window at just the right size. “I watched the footage over and over,” says Denman.

“Sometimes, I would run it at four times the speed and still find something new.”

By September 2013, now with the assistance of Jonathan Wood, Hawking’s graduate assistant, they implemented another iteration of the user interface in Hawking’s computer. “I thought we had it, I thought we were done,” says Denman. However, by the following month, it became clear that, again, Hawking was having trouble adapting. “One of his assistants called it ‘ASTER’ torture,” recalls Denman. “When they said it, Stephen would grin.”

It was many more months before the Intel team came up with a version that pleased Hawking. For instance, Hawking now uses an adaptive word predictor from London startup SwiftKey which allows him to select a word after typing a letter, whereas Hawking’s previous system required him to navigate to the bottom of his user interface and select a word from a list. “His word-prediction system was very old,” says Nachman. “The new system is much faster and efficient, but we had to train Stephen to use it. In the beginning he was complaining about it, and only later I realized why: He already knew which words his previous systems would predict. He was used to predicting his own word predictor.” Intel worked with SwiftKey, incorporating many of Hawking’s documents into the system, so that, in some cases, he no longer needs to type a character before the predictor guesses the word based on context. “The phrase ‘the black hole’ doesn’t require any typing,” says Nachman. “Selecting ‘the’ automatically predicts ‘black’. Selecting ‘black’ automatically predicts ‘hole’.”

The new version of Hawking’s user interface (now called ACAT, after Assistive Contextually Aware Toolkit) includes contextual menus that provide Hawking with various shortcuts to speak, search or email; and a new lecture manager, which gives him control over the timing of his delivery during talks. It also has a mute button, a curious feature that allows Hawking to turn off his speech synthesizer. “Because he operates his switch with his cheek, if he’s eating or traveling, he creates random output,” says Wood. “But there are times when he does like to come up with random speech. He does it all the time and sometimes it’s totally inappropriate. I remember once he randomly typed ‘x x x x’, which, via his speech synthesizer, sounded like ‘sex sex sex sex’.”

Wood’s office is next to Hawking’s. It’s more of a workshop than a study. One wall is heaped with electronic hardware and experimental prototypes. Mounted on the desk is a camera, part of an ongoing project with Intel. “The idea is to have a camera pointed at Stephen’s face to pick up not just his cheek movements but other facial movements,” says Wood. “He could move his jaw sideways, up and down, and drive a mouse and even potentially drive his wheelchair. These are cool ideas but they won’t be coming to completion any time soon.”

Another experimental project, suggested by the manufacturers of Hawking’s wheelchair earlier this year, is a joystick that attaches to Hawking’s chin and allows him to navigate his wheelchair independently. “It’s something that Stephen is very keen on,” says Wood. “The issue was the contact between Stephen’s chin and the joystick. Because he doesn’t have neck movement it is difficult to engage and disengage the joystick.” Wood shows WIRED a video of a recent test trial of this system. In it, you can see Hawking driving his wheelchair across an empty room, in fits and starts. “As you can see, he managed to drive it,” says Wood. “Well, sort of.”

Wood showed WIRED a little grey box, which contained the only copy of Hawking’s speech synthesizer. It’s a CallText 5010, a model given to Hawking in 1988 when he visited the company that manufactured it, Speech Plus. The card inside the synthesizer contains a processor that turns text into speech, a device that was also used for automated telephone answering systems in the 1980s.

“I’m trying to make a software version of Stephen’s voice so that we don’t have to rely on these old hardware cards,” says Wood. To do that, he had to track down the original Speech Plus team. In 1990, Speech Plus was sold to Centigram Communications. Centigram was acquired by Lernout and Hauspie Speech Products, which was acquired by ScanSoft in 2001. ScanSoft was bought by Nuance Communications, a multinational with 35 offices and 1,200 employees. Wood contacted it. “They had software with Stephen’s voice from 1986,” says Wood. “It looks like we may have found it on a backup tape at Nuance.”

Hawking is very attached to his voice: in 1988, when Speech Plus gave him the new synthesizer, the voice was different so he asked them to replace it with the original. His voice had been created in the early ’80s by MIT engineer Dennis Klatt, a pioneer of text-to-speech algorithms. He invented the DECtalk, one of the first devices to translate text into speech. He initially made three voices, from recordings of his wife, daughter and himself. The female’s voice was called “Beautiful Betty”, the child’s “Kit the Kid”, and the male voice, based on his own, “Perfect Paul.” “Perfect Paul” is Hawking’s voice.


Monday 5 January 2015

Streaming: the future of the music industry, or its nightmare?

By Charles Arthur,

If you wonder what the person next to you on the bus or train wearing headphones and looking at their mobile screen is listening to, it is probably the new radio – a streaming service.

According to the music business body the British Phonographic Industry (BPI), Britons streamed 14.8bn tracks last year, almost double the 7.5bn of 2013, as internet connectivity improves and becomes pervasive.

Compared to buying music downloads, streaming services have a number of advantages. Listeners can range over millions of tracks – the “universal jukebox”, create and share playlists socially, discover new artists effortlessly through “artist radio”, and listen anywhere (even downloading temporarily for times when their smartphone gets no signal).

This year Apple is expected to muscle in on the scene using the Beats brand it bought for $3bn (£2bn) in May 2014, as is Google’s YouTube, which last November launched a paid-for, ad-free music and video streaming service, YouTube Music Key.

Snapchat, best known for its self-destructing photos and videos that are a hit with teenagers, is also planning a music feature, according to emails leaked as part of the hack of Sony Pictures. A partnership with the music video service Vevo could be incorporated into future versions – which surely helped the Silicon Valley darling raise another $485m, valuing it at more than $10bn, in the past few weeks.

Sometimes it seems as if everyone is planning a music streaming service, just as a decade ago everyone down to HMV and Walmart offered music downloads.

But unlike downloads, musicians do not universally love streaming.

At the start of November, Taylor Swift removed her new album and back catalogue from Spotify and the other streaming services, having complained in a Wall Street Journal column in July: “Valuable things should be paid for. It’s my opinion that music should not be free.”

Ed Sheeran, BeyoncĂ© and Coldplay have used similar tactics, offering CDs and digital downloads for sale before putting them on streaming services – the opposite of the way radio has been used for promotion for decades.

Yet streaming revenues are rising fast, according to the BPI’s figures: they have zoomed from zero in 2007 to £76.7m in 2013. Data released by the Entertainment Retailers Association and BPI this week suggested wholesale streaming revenues were £125m for 2014. (The ERA reported streaming revenues of £175m, but typically its values show a 40% retail markup over the BPI’s wholesale figures.) The problem with streaming services, though, is that they seem remarkably ineffective at persuading people to hand over their money. If they are the new radio, well, who pays to listen to the radio? And unlike radio, advertising cannot cover the cost of the service.

Spotify, for example, is available to nearly 1.1 billion internet users around the world, yet it can claim only 12.5 million paying users and 50m ad-supported accounts. So only 1% of potential subscribers actually pay. Another service, Deezer, claims to be in 182 countries, giving it about as many potential users (and payers) as Spotify; in mid-2013 it reported 16 million monthly active users, and 5 million subscribers.

The US-only Pandora claims 250 million users, but only 3.3 million paying its $5 a month subscription.

Mark Mulligan of Midia Consulting who has a long track record watching the music business, reckons there are only about 35 million paying subscribers worldwide for all streaming services, out of more than a billion potential users.

Mulligan thinks the problem is the price. Even before the digital revolution, the average person spent less than £5 a month on music, with most spending accounted for by a small number of big buyers. Cutting subscription prices would entice many more to pay, he thinks, easily making up for lost revenues. “I’ve been banging the pricing drum for so long the stick has broken,” he said recently. “Unfortunately there was pitifully little progress in 2014, with label fears of cannibalising 9.99” – the price of a standard album, in dollars or euros, on iTunes – “dominating thoughts”. Something needs to change. The figures suggest streaming is eating into digital downloads rather than CD sales: its revenue growth is almost exactly matched by a fall in digital download revenues, now at their lowest level since 2011. In the US, Nielsen SoundScan has confirmed the same pattern</a>, with paid song downloads down 12% in 2014, from 1.26bn to 1.1bn, while song streaming rocketed from 106bn to 164bn.

There’s another difficulty: streaming services tend to lose money.

Pandora, the market-listed US streaming service, hasn’t made an annual profit since it floated in 2011. Spotify still records losses – even though it is expected to seek a flotation this year.

The main problem is that for each song streamed, the service has to pay a set amount to the record labels; the more songs streamed, the greater the payment, creating a cost barrier that never shrinks. Spotify says it pays out 70% of its revenues to artists.

That could be about to change with the arrival of Apple. Its acquisition of Dr Dre’s Beats was seen as a defensive move after a dramatic fall in iTunes music downloads and revenues. “Apple had to address streaming,” Syd Schwartz, a former EMI Music executive, told Rolling Stone in May.

When Apple introduces Beats Music outside the US, it could galvanise the market. Music industry figures are eager to see what effect it could have because data suggests iPhone owners are typically higher spenders (and so easier to convert to paying subscribers) than the average smartphone buyer. “We’ve reached a very interesting point where there are important changes to come,” a BPI spokesman said. “It seems that we’re moving towards a time of people understanding that streaming is the future.”

Apple is understood to be seeking lower per-song payments from the music labels, so it can offer lower subscription rates. Google’s paid-for YouTube Music Key service launched in November with a six-month free trial and a discounted £7.99-a-month cost (down from £9.99). Mulligan expects that discount to continue, and pricing tiers to fall in line.

Yet YouTube itself might be a key obstacle to boosting subscriptions, because it is unofficially the world’s largest ad-supported music streaming service. Teenagers use it to find songs and related artists exactly as they do the normal streaming services. (Snapchat’s user demographic is a perfect match for that sort of service – which Vevo may seek to capitalise on.) When Swift removed her content from streaming services, it created a media uproar – but all her songs, including new album 1989, could still be found on YouTube.

Mulligan thinks artists and labels will have to swallow their pride and accept the world of change – and lower payments.

“The whole ‘changing download dollars into streaming cents’ issue continues to haunt streaming though,” he said. “With streaming services struggling to see a route to operational profitability the perennial issue of sustainability remains a festering wound. The emerging generation of artists such as Avicii and Ed Sheeran who have never known a life of platinum album sales will learn how to prosper in the streaming era. The rest will have to learn to reinvent themselves, fast – really fast.”


RPM Tech Widget

Search Box

Blog Archive