Augmented reality services
We assume that one of the key reasons is in the difference between a standalone application and a web service. Both architectures have some advantages and disadvantages. The Standalone application (e.g. Nokia/OVI Maps) provides the required functionality. From the user point of view, main asset of t...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Mendel University Press
2013-01-01
|
| Series: | Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://acta.mendelu.cz/61/7/2337/ |
| _version_ | 1818272932732862464 |
|---|---|
| author | Tomáš Koubek David Procházka Jiří Šťastný |
| author_facet | Tomáš Koubek David Procházka Jiří Šťastný |
| author_sort | Tomáš Koubek |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | We assume that one of the key reasons is in the difference between a standalone application and a web service. Both architectures have some advantages and disadvantages. The Standalone application (e.g. Nokia/OVI Maps) provides the required functionality. From the user point of view, main asset of this “offline” approach is network connectivity independence. However, this kind of applications must be upgraded manually. Moreover, it is hard to get any data about the application usage because it requires additional actions from the user – data are usually acquired through conventional ways, such as email or web forms.The online service such as Google Maps (including its mobile application) can offer the same functionality as the offline application. Nevertheless, a permanent connection to provider servers is necessary. This can be taken as a drawback. On the other hand, usage data collection is easier and can be done without the user intervention. The data collection provides a valuable analysis basis of the user habits and needs. This analysis is necessary for design of a complex “user” based solutions such as Google Now.Augmented reality applications are usually based on the first mentioned approach. In this article, we describe our model of augmented reality as a service and compare its features with standalone solutions. Further, other important key aspects for large emergence of augmented reality services in a mainstream market are discussed. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-12T21:49:56Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-4e5b970528e04aa9993506968ca566e6 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1211-8516 2464-8310 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-12T21:49:56Z |
| publishDate | 2013-01-01 |
| publisher | Mendel University Press |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis |
| spelling | doaj.art-4e5b970528e04aa9993506968ca566e62022-12-22T00:10:50ZengMendel University PressActa Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis1211-85162464-83102013-01-016172337234210.11118/actaun201361072337Augmented reality servicesTomáš Koubek0David Procházka1Jiří Šťastný2Department of Informatics, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech RepublicDepartment of Informatics, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech RepublicDepartment of Informatics, Mendel University in Brno, Zemědělská 1, 613 00 Brno, Czech RepublicWe assume that one of the key reasons is in the difference between a standalone application and a web service. Both architectures have some advantages and disadvantages. The Standalone application (e.g. Nokia/OVI Maps) provides the required functionality. From the user point of view, main asset of this “offline” approach is network connectivity independence. However, this kind of applications must be upgraded manually. Moreover, it is hard to get any data about the application usage because it requires additional actions from the user – data are usually acquired through conventional ways, such as email or web forms.The online service such as Google Maps (including its mobile application) can offer the same functionality as the offline application. Nevertheless, a permanent connection to provider servers is necessary. This can be taken as a drawback. On the other hand, usage data collection is easier and can be done without the user intervention. The data collection provides a valuable analysis basis of the user habits and needs. This analysis is necessary for design of a complex “user” based solutions such as Google Now.Augmented reality applications are usually based on the first mentioned approach. In this article, we describe our model of augmented reality as a service and compare its features with standalone solutions. Further, other important key aspects for large emergence of augmented reality services in a mainstream market are discussed.https://acta.mendelu.cz/61/7/2337/augmented realitylocation based servicesserver client |
| spellingShingle | Tomáš Koubek David Procházka Jiří Šťastný Augmented reality services Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis augmented reality location based services server client |
| title | Augmented reality services |
| title_full | Augmented reality services |
| title_fullStr | Augmented reality services |
| title_full_unstemmed | Augmented reality services |
| title_short | Augmented reality services |
| title_sort | augmented reality services |
| topic | augmented reality location based services server client |
| url | https://acta.mendelu.cz/61/7/2337/ |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT tomaskoubek augmentedrealityservices AT davidprochazka augmentedrealityservices AT jiristastny augmentedrealityservices |