The Hololens was pretty crappy, though. The Oculus is a much more refined experience, and even there it's not clear that it's good enough to step out of novelty into mass market. I'd say Oculus is close, and Hololens has a very long way to go.

Actually, if you had a drone with a mountedprojector, wouldnt this be a more convenient path?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_retinal_display

Are you suggesting that the drone would project into your eye? What would be the advantage of that over wearing a mounted headset? Not saying it's a bad idea, I just don't really get the advantage, and it seems like there'd be some disadvantages (especially the annoying noise).

Did u even use Hololens? Hololens is the best AR with best Tracking and mapping.

Comparing AR device with VR device itself is not correct. Every one in VR world knows HTC Vive has far superior experience than Rift.

Yes, I have used the Hololens. It's technically impressive, and the structured light-based environment mapping seems to work well. It's easily the best of the AR bunch that I've played with, but it's still got far too many problems to get past the interesting tech demo stage, and it's nowhere near ready for mainstream adoption. The display quality is somewhere just north of flaming garbage, and it's certainly nowhere near the type of quality they've shown in those CG heavy videos.

I understand that AR and VR are very different challenges, I was simply comparing them as two nascent techs that are frequently talked about together as being upcoming. VR is much closer to being ready for primetime, despite Hololens' release. Even the Oculus DK1 was closer to ready for mass adoption.

And most of /r/oculus would vigorously debate your last sentence since Touch came out, which makes that sentence completely false. I say this as a Vive owner, Touch has taken away the Vive's main advantage.