Maybe Microsoft gives jobs to smart people and lets them work on whatever they want just to prevent those people from working for its competitors and possibly changing the game unpredictably. Microsoft has nowhere to go but down. It's probably worth it for Microsoft to pay them not to work for anyone else even with no intention of productizing their research activities.
About 95% of the 3d/multitouch interfaces I've seen so far from MS labs are cool but don't seem useful. What if in the end, a user can achieve a faster overall speed with a traditional keyboard/mouse combo?
Another huge problem to overcome with new interfaces like this is the compatibility of existing stuff. Even if I get my hands on one of these beauties, virtually no software is designed for this usage. It will take years before 3d gets a good integration into desktop software, just like multitouch has been in the works in the 90s without any (very few?) consumer level applications.
the 3D display is awesome, but there's a lot of other things required before you can give it to consumers and say "this is better than your current desktop". For instance is the 3D OS better than 2D windows? Can a user use the 3D OS for long periods of time?
What's sad is that they also patented, so the technology is effectively lost, after they develop it, and conclude it doesn't jive with their current business strategy someone else can't develop it for fear of infringement.
It's because writing a research paper, making a prototype and putting out a cool 3 minute video is much, much easier than developing a reliable, affordable, usable, consumer friendly product that fills an actual need. MS is good at the former but poor at executing the latter.
IMO it's because of MS' refusal (or inability?) to release products rapidly (unlike Google and others). When MS chooses to enter a market, they like to pour resources into it to DOMINATE within 1-3 years. If they aren't a top 2 or 3 player within those years, they pull out (e.g. silverlight, kin, etc). It's a valid strategy when done well, but it has been hurting their image as a tech leader since they've had many highly public failures.
Not a new concept however it's awesome to see a working version of it! I don't expect to see Microsoft moving forward with it though. it seems that Microsoft likes to build prototypes that never make it into products, Google however is opposite they like to make products from prototypes. In the end I would be willing to wager that Apple is the first to implement this type of system in a consumer product.
Their next OS will be "Microsoft Boxes". They'll have to use a "Tessellating Box Manager" until they figure out how to make their boxes overlap as if it were 4D, in Boxes 3.1.
My last job was with a big French company that makes stuff for trains. We had good business case for the use of some see-through displays at train platforms (2D was enough though). We tested a few displays/prototypes but they were all still in their infancy. Personally I can't wait to see this sort of stuff take off.
Think about it: When I point a projector at a white screen, and display an image with black regions, those regions are actually the same color as the white screen they're projected onto. "Black" is entirely defined by its contrast by the surrounding regions, so just having less-bright areas will give you at least an approximation of black.
I think that would defeat the whole purpose of the display being transparent so that you can see your hands. The display itself is not "3d" but is simply changing the perspective displayed based on the position of the user's head.
Adding an LCD layer to a transparent OLED screen just gives you an alpha channel, effectively. Independent control over emission and transmission. I've thought about this many times when my mind has occasion to wander.
People mention that objection a lot but I think it might be a feature rather than a bug. Perhaps it would be best to have some non-dismissible reminders that we should not be sitting in front of a screen and pecking buttons for eight hours a day.
