Augmented Reality and the Gartner Hype Cycle

With all the current hype surrounding Augmented Reality (AR) I often wonder where we stand, in terms of its overall evolution and logical conclusion. No doubt we will continue to see countless gimmicks but what will happen when we all become immune to the initial excitement and when assumed expectations cannot be met? The ‘hype cycle’ (a term first coined by Gartner Inc. in 1995) is a novel, yet surprisingly accurate way of explaining such a phenomenon. A new technology trigger causes a surge in expectation before peaking at over-inflation. A subsequent ‘trough of disillusionment’ is often accompanied by a hefty slump. Steady improvement, along a ‘slope of enlightenment’, then reaches a so-called ‘plateau of productivity’. But what does all this mean for AR? Are we set to become disillusioned or will we be steadily englightened?

With speculation rife and the technology in its relative infancy, realistically we are only at the very start. Of course the time frame for such a cycle could span decades or more: If we consider the Web as an example – from it’s early beginnings in 1991 to the bursting of the dot-com bubble in March 2000 – it was just short of a decade. The ‘trough of disillusionment’ was comparatively short but the growth and success spearheaded by Web 2.0 has afforded another decade of growth, the ‘plateau of productivity’ now appears firm and consistent.

In terms of AR, Google Trends may already suggest we are beginning to show signs of inflated expectation with search indicating a noticeable slowdown. However, this phase is likely to be temporary with an improved surge yet to come: Perhaps when a lightweight portable device such as the iPad (or similar) includes a camera, we may really begin to witness a degree of innovative use, but admittedly it still leaves a lot to be desired. The other key milestone of course is the migration from hand-held device to eyewear or even contact lens, the holy grail in terms of interface. This is something I explored in part during my MArch thesis though as something of a counter to a pure physical architectural manifestation, as a way of enhancing the true experience thus ensuring the technology was never an end in itself.

The hypothetical conclusion and speculative prediction of technology whilst in its infancy will always serve to enhance inflated expectation. What we don’t always know is whether an imagined reality could in fact be a successful reality, obtainable during the so-called plateau of productivity. Furthermore, evolution is impossible to predict: It is quite probable that the eventual outcome will be fundamentally different than that of the expectation, if not unobtainable or even undesirable.

Two notable examples of future realities are Augmented City by Keiichi Matsuda (shown above) and Mixed Reality by Nokia Research, both sensational yet completely fascinating.

About George

George Metcalfe recently graduated with Distinction as Master of Architecture from the WSA. A freelance designer and multi-creative, he is interested in the intersection between architecture, urbanism and information communication technology.

View all posts by George →